The F1 thread

marauder

I'd be checking Masi's bank account for any shady transactions

Simonh

Masi was clearly influenced by red bull/Horner. Zero credibility remaining.

gavin_axecaster

So the RD can literally make the rules up on the spot?

stickyfiddle

The third-to-last paragraph is most relevant. "Because he already fucked up by announcing the SC would come in, we aren't changing anything"

Fretwired

Masi is given authority to do as he pleases ... the FIA should look at Twitter and social media in general. It's damaging the brand ..

Garold86

What an absolute farce. There was no good outcome. But that wording - gosh. Keep on digging.

gavin_axecaster

Well let's be honest we knew the stewards weren't going to rule against Masi.

FIA only cares about bottom line, same as Liberty Media. They will see the increased revenue from "tourists" watching this race (C4 would have paid a pretty penny to show it live and I'm sure other channels/territories did too) and love it.

I do wonder if Merc will bother with going the legal route now?

Simonh

Merc have lodged the intention to appeal. I am considering if I will bother watching or attending again.

Simonh

While I understand that the race director could/should have some discretion on how the rules are applied around some events if the long standing process is thrown out of the window after teams have already made critical decisions then there is no hope of a fair and equitable outcome.

Teetonetal

So masi has the power to pretty much decide who gets to be world champion?

Sure max had to overtake, but it should never have been a possibility.

Simonh said:

While I understand that the race director could/should have some discretion on how the rules are applied around some events if the long standing process is thrown out of the window after teams have already made critical decisions then there is no hope of a fair and equitable outcome.

Yup, how can a team make a decision if they no idea how / if the rules will be applied

stickyfiddle

Simonh said:

While I understand that the race director could/should have some discretion on how the rules are applied around some events if the long standing process is thrown out of the window after teams have already made critical decisions then there is no hope of a fair and equitable outcome.

Agreed. Why not have a rule that says "if a safety car is called in the last 10 laps it's an automatic red flag and restart"

There should be significantly more rules written as "If [action] then [consequence]" for anything that doesn't require judgement of whether a driver did something intentionally or whatever.

And Masi should have a team who know this shit backwards so he only has to be the messenger/executioner. 

joeyowen

Am I missing something or is the Any vs All remark completely flawed

"Any cars lapped by the leader...will be required"

How are the words any and all different in the context of this?  Or does it not matter because Masi does what he wants?

DesVegas

Just got back from seeing the Christmas lights in London and watched the highlights. 

Go Max Go!!

Glad there's a new champ.

I would have preferred Carlos but no-one likes a monopoly.

*Edit - I don't like a monopoly

Teetonetal

DesVegas said:

Just got back from seeing the Christmas lights in London and watched the highlights. 

Go Max Go!!

Glad there's a new champ.

I would have preferred Carlos but no-one likes a monopoly.

*Edit - I don't like a monopoly

Especially masi and the FIA

Rich210

Simonh said:

Masi was clearly influenced by red bull/Horner. Zero credibility remaining.

Agree 100%

thumpingrug

joeyowen said:

Am I missing something or is the Any vs All remark completely flawed

"Any cars lapped by the leader...will be required"

How are the words any and all different in the context of this?  Or does it not matter because Masi does what he wants?

I suspect that at some point in the past someone suggested using "all cars passed" until it was pointed out that cars that had already retired or crashed would not be able to pass and therefore someone could argue against it.  It will have been changed to "any car" with all parties, at the time understanding that it meant the same thing.  Years down the line the original parties have moved on and now they are using to agree that any and all are not the same thing.  Its legal bullshit that layers get paid a ton of money to leave very uncertain.

Im still not convinced this is over.

Rich210

thumpingrug said:

joeyowen said:

Am I missing something or is the Any vs All remark completely flawed

"Any cars lapped by the leader...will be required"

How are the words any and all different in the context of this?  Or does it not matter because Masi does what he wants?

I suspect that at some point in the past someone suggested using "all cars passed" until it was pointed out that cars that had already retired or crashed would not be able to pass and therefore someone could argue against it.  It will have been changed to "any car" with all parties, at the time understanding that it meant the same thing.  Years down the line the original parties have moved on and now they are using to agree that any and all are not the same thing.  Its legal bullshit that layers get paid a ton of money to leave very uncertain.

Im still not convinced this is over.

It's definitely not over. I think some teams might think twice given the lack of rules and certainty they bring. Given that the race director was influenced by the reaction of RB, it really throws the sport under the bus. Would Mercedes and other teams think it's worth investing in if the race director is so easy swayed. It's bullshit

AustrianJohn

Rich210 said:

It's definitely not over. I think some teams might think twice given the lack of rules and certainty they bring. Given that the race director was influenced by the reaction of RB, it really throws the sport under the bus. Would Mercedes and other teams think it's worth investing in if the race director is so easy swayed. It's bullshit

Agree 100%

GSPBASSES

I absolutely agree what a shambles, however I think we need to stand back and have a look at what happen when the safety car was called. Red Bull had the sense to bring Max in, Mercedes did not bring Hamilton in, another cock up on there part, how many times have Mercedes made bad calls and lost Hamilton races, which I believe they did this time as well. If Max and Hamilton both had new tires on when the safety car was called in, even if Max was in the lead I think Hamilton would've got him.

So may be a couple of rule changes need to be made, Under a red flag no changing of tires, if a tire is damage and on safety grounds it has to be changed the car should go to the back of the restart grid. If a safety car is called in within the last 10 laps , it should be a red flag, all cars go to a grid position where they are on track, when the safety car is called, nothing on the car should be touched.

Fretwired

GSPBASSES said:

I absolutely agree what a shambles, however I think we need to stand back and have a look at what happen when the safety car was called. Red Bull had the sense to bring Max in, Mercedes did not bring Hamilton in, another cock up on there part, how many times have Mercedes made bad calls and lost Hamilton races, which I believe they did this time as well. If Max and Hamilton both had new tires on when the safety car was called in, even if Max was in the lead I think Hamilton would've got him.

Mercedes couldn't bring Hamilton in .. the race could have finished under a safety car in which case they'd have lost the race. Red Bull were in the pound seats as they had nothing to lose.

The FIA could make things fairer by closing the pit lane when a safety car is deployed and stopping teams from changing tyres and repairing damage in a red flag situation.