FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[EwanM]

I think there is a general flaw in the regulations. Nobody can deny that - it has caught all the teams out.
However I do not feel Hamilton nor Mclaren should have lied.
As James Allen said - its another Watergate, the fallout is worse than the act itself. This doesn't speak well for the team, in my opinion, and although I do not want ANY harsh punishment on the team itself, there must be an admission of guilt here.

[kerc]

It's absurd that a team has no idea on what to do, and that when they need to contact someone regarding that, they get no response.

And McLaren aren't the only ones who have faced such situations. If the FIA had clear-cut rules and te appropriate personnel available that really knew about the rules, we wouldn't see this mess. Like StealthGate007 mentioned, a race's outcome should be final before everyone goes home.

[Denthúl]

It's absurd that a team has no idea on what to do, and that when they need to contact someone regarding that, they get no response.

Race control would likely have been busy ensuring that the track was cleaned up quickly. With it being only a few laps from the end of the race, it would've been quite hectic.

[kerc]

Race control would likely have been busy ensuring that the track was cleaned up quickly. With it being only a few laps from the end of the race, it would've been quite hectic.

Agreed, not an easy situation, but you gotta have someone available to answer any team's request.

[McLaren Fan]

He also lost it on the track. Face it, you can't say Trulli didn't do the right thing - he tried to give the position back several times. The result should have stood at Trulli 3rd, Lewis 4th.

Everything which followed Hamilton going into third place when Trulli went off the track was a consequence of the flaws in the regulations.

Yes, this is true.

However, if you misinterpret the regulations outside of safety car conditions and let someone pass you, you can't turn around and change your mind later. So such a thing should not be permissible under the safety car.

I've already said I agree that the regulations are flawed and that they should be changed. But at present, we've got what we've got.

It's absurd that a team has no idea on what to do, and that when they need to contact someone regarding that, they get no response.

Race control would likely have been busy ensuring that the track was cleaned up quickly. With it being only a few laps from the end of the race, it would've been quite hectic.

And that's McLaren and Toyota's problem? I don't think so. The FIA need to learn lessons from last weekend.

[kerc]

And that's McLaren and Toyota's problem? I don't think so. The FIA need to learn lessons from last weekend.

Definitely. This could happen to any team.

[bud]

And that's McLaren and Toyota's problem? I don't think so. The FIA need to learn lessons from last weekend.

youre dreaming they are perfect in their eyes!

and if everyones a saint i would like to hear Charlie Whitings reasonings for his delay of the SC when Nakajima crashed.

[Gert]

And that's McLaren and Toyota's problem? I don't think so. The FIA need to learn lessons from last weekend.

youre dreaming they are perfect in their eyes!

and if everyones a saint i would like to hear Charlie Whitings reasonings for his delay of the SC when Nakajima crashed.

Charlie likes to have his driunks bought foir hi by Ross Brawn - factor that in.

[Denthúl]

He also lost it on the track. Face it, you can't say Trulli didn't do the right thing - he tried to give the position back several times. The result should have stood at Trulli 3rd, Lewis 4th.

Everything which followed Hamilton going into third place when Trulli went off the track was a consequence of the flaws in the regulations.

Yes, this is true.

However, if you misinterpret the regulations outside of safety car conditions and let someone pass you, you can't turn around and change your mind later. So such a thing should not be permissible under the safety car.

I've already said I agree that the regulations are flawed and that they should be changed. But at present, we've got what we've got.

It's absurd that a team has no idea on what to do, and that when they need to contact someone regarding that, they get no response.

Race control would likely have been busy ensuring that the track was cleaned up quickly. With it being only a few laps from the end of the race, it would've been quite hectic.

And that's McLaren and Toyota's problem? I don't think so. The FIA need to learn lessons from last weekend.

Yes, they do.

[SarahB62]

Editorial comment from PlanetF1

Why PF1 Is Still Using The Word 'Allegedly'
Thursday 2nd April 2009

The FIA have once again played with F1's results, meaning to the average fan there is not point in watching the race - you can rather tune in a week later to find what result the FIA have chosen...


* This is a disaster for the image of the sport - if not the sport itself.


As a described sport, F1 is an activity that should be won and lost in a sporting arena. A courtroom is not part of that arena and if the men in suits are to rewrite the results of a sporting occasion then it should only be as a last resort, with reluctance and in the most extreme of circumstances.


The problem F1 has in maintaining its claim to still be regarded as a sport is that, having set the tone for interference and revision on Saturday night in Melbourne when both Toyotas were excluded from qualifying, two separate changes to Sunday's result have since been forthcoming. And a third may yet follow with a FIA hearing due on April 14 to consider the legality of 'The Diffuser Three'.


What sort of sport can this claim to be? F1 seems intent on falling over a cliff into deep and dark waters.



* PF1 made a similar observation when Hamilton was excluded from the Belgian GP on the opinion of three stewards. It also lamented the contempt with which F1 supporters had been treated by a three-paragraph statement that the FIA deemed sufficient for the task of both informing and explaining their ruling.


Seven months later, nothing's changed, nothing's been learnt.


Once again, F1 supporters are floundering in the dark, feeding on pathetic scraps. The latest missive from the stewards' room tells us of disqualification, cites the relevant clause of the rulebook and claims the crime of 'misleading evidence'. But nothing else. What this misleading evidence is (or was) remains a great and unacceptable unknown. Read closely, the stewards' statement is vague on whether it was Hamilton or McLaren (or both) who provided the misleading evidence.


If the FIA, through their race stewards, are to tamper retrospectively with race results then they have a duty, as custodians off the sport, to provide full explanations; and as followers of the sport, F1 fans have a right to expect as much.


Instead, we're still as much as in the dark as we were in Spa last year. In the absence of clarity, a dark cloud hangs over F1 and a febrile atmosphere in which conjecture, paranoia and slander can pervade has been allowed to fester.



* "The Stewards having considered the new elements presented to them from the 2009 Australian Formula One Grand Prix, consider that driver No 1 Lewis Hamilton and the competitor Vodafone McLaren Mercedes acted in a manner prejudicial to the conduct of the event by providing evidence deliberately misleading to the Stewards at the hearing on Sunday 29th March 2009, a breach of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code."


In the absence of further information, the invetable reading of that statement will be the conclusion that the FIA have adjudged Hamilton and/or McLaren to be akin to a liar. And that's putting it mildly.


Even beyond the obvious implications of that judgement from a sporting perspective, the repercussions of such a ruling are massive. To question a man's integrity is one thing; to damn it is quite another. This story will not end here. Given the damage this ruling will apply to Hamilton's reputation both as a sportsman and a man, it can not end here.


If the FIA is willing to make such a judgement then it is beholden upon them to permit Hamilton an attempt to clear his name (if this is what he chooses to do). Even if they do not, they may have no choice but to defend their ruling in another type of court room.



* And it is for that reason that the FIA have no option but to issue full transcripts and recordings of their two hearings as well as explain, definitively, what exactly persuaded them to conclude that Hamilton and/or McLaren had provided misleading evidence.


As far as PF1 is concerned, and we're not an especially righteous website, Hamilton and McLaren have been found guilty of allegedly providing misleading evidence. Until evidence is provided that proves the FIA's case, anything less would break one of the most fundamental principles in law.


Pete Gill

[Denthúl]

Hooray. PF1 have only just tagged on to what we've all been saying for years.

[SarahB62]

[juggles]

Well, another hugely confusing screw-up from the FIA. The whole situation is a shambles.

It sounds like Lewis did lie to the stewards, and that disappoints me; lying is not having the guts to face up to reality and I wouldn't have expected it. It seems even more idiotic considering he must have known he wouldn't get away with it? Still, he deserved that 3rd place fair and square; he went past Trulli legally, what followed after that was a result of neither driver knowing the letter of the law. If Hamilton had known 100% he was allowed past Trulli he obviously wouldn't have let the Italian through again; this makes arguments about Lewis letting Trulli through being his own problem slightly dubious.

Do the FIA intentionally make the rules subjective so they can come down on any driver they have it in for like a ton of bricks? Lewis was stupid to lie to them, but he naturally felt cheated of a hard-earned podium; I'm not trying to condone what he did, but he would never have been in a position to do it if it wasn't for the pathetic amateurism of F1's governing body.

[EwanM]

Hooray. PF1 have only just tagged on to what we've all been saying for years.

[kerc]

It sounds like Lewis did lie to the stewards, and that disappoints me; lying is not having the guts to face up to reality and I wouldn't have expected it. It seems even more idiotic considering he must have known he wouldn't get away with it?

That's why I smell "team orders" all over this.