Motorsport Off Topic Thread

[JRS]

There is a difference, if a rule is changed and therefore something that was legal before isn't now legal, that is one thing. If a rule always intended said thing to be illegal, but some idiot at some race randomly decides it is legal for a few races, before the same thing being declared illegal, that is a bit different.

*sigh*

It was declared legal to race, therefore results stand. Had they declared it illegal at the time, RBR could have changed it at the time. So why should they have points taken off them retrospectively?

Essentially what has happened here, from what I can tell is, the stewards/whiting have INCORRECTLY deemed something legal, that in fact wasn't.

Well, obviously the prevailing opinion a few races back was that this was a legal development. Now, after a bit of thought has gone into it, this design is being declared illegal from now on.

What happens if HRT to grab some press just throw a turbo in their car, and Whiting has a funny weekend and decides its legal for no apparent reason, and a couple weeks later the FIA get together and say, errm, no thats illegal.

An absurd argument. This isn't as blatant as a turbocharger being strapped to an engine and you know it.

At the end of the day, it's as simple as this - if a rule can be misinterpreted (accidentally or wilfully), then it needs altering. But that altering cannot and should not change previous results. Go down that road, and you've got to take back quite a few trophies handed out over the years and give them to someone else.

 

[dannyjo22]

It's because it's the evil red bull.

It's not like Mclaren where stripped of all their points for running a michelin tyre that was deemed illegal after clarification.

This happens all the time. Part cleared and passed, re clarified as illegal. They change the part. It just happens this part because it's simple has been tackled mid season, unlike the F duct which they let run until the end of the year.

Personally if it's been cleared and Red Bull have developed it they should be allowed to run it until the end of the season, unless it's a safety issue.

 

[drunkenmaster]

It's because it's the evil red bull.

It's not like Mclaren where stripped of all their points for running a michelin tyre that was deemed illegal after clarification.

This happens all the time. Part cleared and passed, re clarified as illegal. They change the part. It just happens this part because it's simple has been tackled mid season, unlike the F duct which they let run until the end of the year.

Personally if it's been cleared and Red Bull have developed it they should be allowed to run it until the end of the season, unless it's a safety issue.

Re CLARIFED, or re-CLASSIFIED as illegal, this is the fundamental difference.

One case, you have a part its absolutely legal according to the rules, the FIA look into it at some point and literally change the rule to make it illegal, this part wasn't illegal when it was used, is now. A part that is illegal, was always illegal, people are unclear on the rule, they go to the big guys at the top and ask so is this legal or not, and they make the rule clearer for everyone that the part is illegal, then it always was illegal.

The only thing I see here is, people passing a part they never should have, and that mistake aparently being unable to be fixed.

“It has been argued that, as it is not explicitly stated that fully enclosed holes cannot be located in a surface lying on the step plane rearward of a line 450mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit template, then they may be located in such areas. We disagree with this view and consider it implicit that fully enclosed holes may not be located there.”

JRS, surely this clearly says the rule hasn't changed, they are simply saying Red Bull thought the rule wasn't clear, the FIA have come out and said, the rule is clear, you aren't allowed to do it, its illegal. They haven't changed the rule, therefore it was always illegal?

It's simple Red bull AND Whiting and his people WERE misreading the rule, this led to Red Bull running an illegal part AND Whiting deeming it legal when it wasn't.

From now on with no rule change the FIA have told Whiting and his people the rule is implicit(and always was) and will no longer be allowed.

IF they'd changed the rule, then that would be a completely different ball game, they haven't they've simply told everyone what the rule means as its always meant since day one of the season. it WAS illegal at the last three races, the FIA have said so, Whiting has wrongly said it's legal.

People fully expected the RBR wing to eventually fail if they could work out to test it under load, it never did(largely because the test was a joke), but everyone also expected it to destroy RBR if it happened as they'd used it all year and the rule hadn't changed. IT passed testing, didn't actually make it legal, here the reason for passing was a mistake by Whiting, not **** poor testing, the result is the same. When the part is found legal(if it is) then any races they were in using the illegal part should be changed to reflect it.

 

[Sparky]

Read the rules then throw in your 2 pennies worth. the FIA and stewards deemed it legal so we could race with it. If they had'nt, then we would have had to remove it, simples! We pushed the rules and were told it was legal. Seem to remember a similar scenario where we pushed the rules on front wings and other teams got the FIA to change the rules mid-season, guess what, we still passed the tests! F1 is all about pushing the limits [or rules ] as far as you can get away with.

 

[JRS]

the FIA and stewards deemed it legal so we could race with it. If they had'nt, then we would have had to remove it, simples!

Exactly. That should be the end of the discussion. Except for some reason, everyone is still banging the drum of 'it's been ruled illegal now, so why do they get to keep their points from when it hadn't been ruled illegal?'. And yet they never seem to spot just how utterly bonkers their position actually is....very strange.

 

[Skeeter]

I'm with JRS. The problem with all these type of arguments is the people who don't understand what they are bashing on about.

Should we wipe out all historic F1 results from everyone because they didn't race with the 2.4l V8 engines that are the requirement now?

 

[Sparky]

No, because people on here always find a angle to suit their argument. Its quite funny really!

 

[deuse]

Read the rules then throw in your 2 pennies worth. the FIA and stewards deemed it legal so we could race with it. If they had'nt, then we would have had to remove it, simples! We pushed the rules and were told it was legal. Seem to remember a similar scenario where we pushed the rules on front wings and other teams got the FIA to change the rules mid-season, guess what, we still passed the tests! F1 is all about pushing the limits [or rules ] as far as you can get away with.

Funny as the rules say

"The FIA has moved to outlaw the design however, saying that the rule book makes it implicit that fully enclosed
holes may not be located in the bodywork just ahead of the rear wheels."

Time for charlie whiting to go as he doesn't know his own rules or is he getting a back hander here and there?

 

[Duke]

Funny as the rules say

"The FIA has moved to outlaw the design however, saying that the rule book makes it implicit that fully enclosed
holes may not be located in the bodywork just ahead of the rear wheels."

Time for charlie whiting to go as he doesn't know his own rules or is he getting a back hander here and there?

This is what annoys me. You can't have him saying its fine and then the FIA to say it isn't at some point later.

RB were fully entitled to run the car, but it shouldn't have been in the first place.

 

[JRS]

The issue isn't whether or not the design was ever legal by the letter of the rulebook. That's a moot point, since it's been declared illegal now. The issue is whether or not they should keep the points won using that design. And of course they should - the stewards ruled the car legal to race. Had they not done so, and RBR raced it anyway, then they would obviously lose the points. But because they ok'ed it, the car was effectively legal when raced.

And that should be the end of it. But I expect this'll run on for a while longer

 

[Duke]

The issue isn't whether or not the design was ever legal by the letter of the rulebook. That's a moot point, since it's been declared illegal now. The issue is whether or not they should keep the points won using that design. And of course they should - the stewards ruled the car legal to race. Had they not done so, and RBR raced it anyway, then they would obviously lose the points. But because they ok'ed it, the car was effectively legal when raced.

And that should be the end of it. But I expect this'll run on for a while longer

Well that is the issue in my eyes. I don't mind they keep the points - they will - for the reason you said, it was legal at the time and no protest was launched. It just shouldn't have made it past scrutineering in the first place.

 

[deuse]

The issue isn't whether or not the design was ever legal by the letter of the rulebook. That's a moot point, since it's been declared illegal now. The issue is whether or not they should keep the points won using that design. And of course they should - the stewards ruled the car legal to race. Had they not done so, and RBR raced it anyway, then they would obviously lose the points. But because they ok'ed it, the car was effectively legal when raced.

And that should be the end of it. But I expect this'll run on for a while longer

Of course they should not keep the points and here is why

1 Sauber cars rear wing were found not to comply with the rules. They were thrown out of the results and the cars which finished behind them were promoted in the standings.

2 Lewis was put to the back after a tech rule at the Spanish Grand Prix

3 Does a olympic athlete keep his gold medal after a failed drugs test.. NO

Somethings not right with the FIAs representative charlie whiting, he should check all cars before a team complains not after.

F1 is getting joke now...they have lost over 300,000 viewers this year so far.

 

[Demon]

Oh yes, absolutely. Let's stamp out any and all creativity in the interpretation of the rulebook....then we can have a spec racing series, with all the drivers in absolutely equal cars and no innovation whatsoever in the supposed pinnacle of motorsport. Huzzah.

What a ridiculous misinterpretation, no wonder you seem all 'angry' about the situation.

All I mean by this is that scrutineering should ensure cars adhere to the 'rules'. As it stands, you can easily pass scrutineering with parts that are obviously (to other teams and now the FIA on closer inspection) illegal according to the rules.. How can the FIA deem things legal one minute and illegal the next?

This does not stop creativitiy or innovation, the fact you can't understand this is baffling, you do know you can innovate without breaching current rules.. In fact innovating that way seems to me, more intelligent then 'innovating' by breaking current rules and relying on poor scrutineering to sneak it in.

Of course a car that passes muster with the scrutineers should keep results. It's been declared legal to race. If a later clarification to the rules would mean that next time out it would fail scrutineering then of course the team has to change the car. But that does not make any previous results null and void!

Did you miss the point where I said

Now, on the other hand, I think the crappy mechanism the FIA use might be how RB can confidently stand behind not being retrospectively banned, because the only mechanism I can see by which the FIA would have to let the previous race results stand is that the daftness that if a car passes scrutineering, no matter how many rules it breaches, it's deemed 'legal' as a result of passing the tests..

So I agree..

But it wasn't found immediately illegal, was it? The stewards cleared it to race. Therefore it was legal at the time. Now, it's no longer legal going forward.

And that's my point, they need to stop this ridiculous situation where obvious rule breaches can get by scrutineering so easiliy because they can't interpret their own rules consistently, it leads to this 2 tier confusion of what is/isn't legal and just looks **** to the public.

This is a really simple concept guys. Car declared legal to race - results stand. Rule then clarified. Car no longer legal to race - car must be changed. This is not rocket science!

See above point, we all understand the idiotic stupidity of the 'simplicitiy', shame you can't understand the higher level issue of why illegal cars can easily pass scrutineering in this manner.

This is part of the reason why I'm no longer bothering with the race weekend threads on here. Far too much rampant lunacy

I think that lunacy would largely be from yourself bringing it in

End of the day, I said I was looking at it from both sides, I acknowledged why I understood RB kept their points for the very obvious reasons we all agree on, but my other side of this is how ineffectual scrutineering is.

If you wish to think I am naively misunderstanding how the FIA legalities work, then so be it.

 

[MagicBoy]

Somethings not right with the FIAs representative charlie whiting, he should check all cars before a team complains not after.

It's always been the way in F1.

First example that springs to mind : Brabham fan car from 1978. Technically legal, won it's first race at a canter. Rule clarification effectively banned it from the next race. Did they lose the points? No.

 

[Kerming]

No, because people on here always find a angle to suit their argument. Its quite funny really!

exactly, its abit sad tbh.

 

[Demon]

It's always been the way in F1.

First example that springs to mind : Brabham fan car from 1978. Technically legal, won it's first race at a canter. Rule clarification effectively banned it from the next race. Did they lose the points? No.

Yep, there are many cases like this over the years. I think it is about time it changed personally, but I'm not that bothered to be frank.

You would think that when being scrutineered, anything 'suspect' is flagged for FIA investigation automatically, that would limit these things to all being short term.

And it would be good to get some consistency of punishment, e.g.
- If a rule has to be changed to 'clarify' something that then leads to illegality, there is no punishment to the team
- If it's found a part is illegal according to current rules, then I think some punishment should be given, either last race points, or dropped to the back of the grid on the next race

Its this multi-tiered and massively inconcistent punishment scheme that most of us hate.



I actually have zero issues with Redbull and keeping their points, I just find the way the FIA pass it so incompetently, then when it's pointed out how it's obviously implicitly illegal, and change their minds, that's let a team use an illegal part for a couple or so races and have zero choice but to let them keep any advantage that may have given..

 

[CaptainRAVE]

The difference between the mass damps, 4th brake pedal, f duct etc - they were legal and then banned by creating rules to stop them being used. RBR with their flexing wings, ride height control and floor holes are exploiting the inability for the FIA to test them. It's the difference between playing by the rules and not getting caught cheating IMO.

 

[GravyMonster]

Just read that Vettel is going to be a guest on David Letterman. I can just imagine literally MILLIONS of confused Americans looking at each other and asking, "Who the **** is that?".

 

[Skeeter]

How do you work out that F1 has lost 300,000 viewers?

 

[Duke]

Just read that Vettel is going to be a guest on David Letterman. I can just imagine literally MILLIONS of confused Americans looking at each other and asking, "Who the **** is that?".

Pimping Infinity?