FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[f1ea]

of course they will take legal actions. I would do that, too, personally.

It's kind of like doing 75 in a 65 Mph zone. Everyone does it and it's rarely enforced, but every now and then you get a cop who decides he has to give you a ticket. So you decide to not pay the fine. You take legal action instead, go to court with the defense of everyone else was doing it... No one likes the law, everyone skirts it or ignores it for the most part. However it is still a law and you broke it so the judge will rule based on the law.

They got their fine. They paid it. Or will pay it.

Doing 75 in a 65 zone doesnt mean they take your car away. The 'cops' can't just invent a punishment because of what the media or whatever thinks the punishement should be. If it were like that, we'd have hangings and stonings everyday.

There's always the question of LEGAL PRECEDENT. Courts base their punishments on similar crimes and their respective punishments. if it has been done and gets done every day to no punishment... what makes 'this' case deserving of the electric chair? teh fact that Massa pouted? the fact that Smedley said "good lad" ?

[What's Burning?]

of course they will take legal actions. I would do that, too, personally.

It's kind of like doing 75 in a 65 Mph zone. Everyone does it and it's rarely enforced, but every now and then you get a cop who decides he has to give you a ticket. So you decide to not pay the fine. You take legal action instead, go to court with the defense of everyone else was doing it... No one likes the law, everyone skirts it or ignores it for the most part. However it is still a law and you broke it so the judge will rule based on the law.

They got their fine. They paid it. Or will pay it.

Doing 75 in a 65 zone doesnt mean they take your car away. The 'cops' can't just invent a punishment because of what the media or whatever thinks the punishement should be. If it were like that, we'd have hangings and stonings everyday.

There's always the question of LEGAL PRECEDENT. Courts base their punishments on similar crimes and their respective punishments. if it has been done and gets done every day to no punishment... what makes 'this' case deserving of the electric chair? teh fact that Massa pouted? the fact that Smedley said "good lad" ?

I'm not talking about the electric chair, but in this case, Ferrari, and it's fans would complain even if the punishment was the fine given and changing the points to give Massa 1st, and Alonso 2nd. Which would be the mildest thing that could happen. i don't think Ferrari will either be made a scapegoat or see anything near the "worst". But legal proceedings by Ferrari is akin to the it's my ball so I'm taking it and going home playground argument in the 5th grade.

We'll have a ruling soon enough, and then we can talk more about it.

[f1ea]

I'm not talking about the electric chair, but in this case, Ferrari, and it's fans would complain even if the punishment was the fine given and changing the points to give Massa 1st, and Alonso 2nd. Which would be the mildest thing that could happen. i don't think Ferrari will either be made a scapegoat or see anything near the "worst". But legal proceedings by Ferrari is akin to the it's my ball so I'm taking it and going home playground argument in the 5th grade.

Changing the finishing order is the same as making a team order to affect the outcome of the race. Against the spirit of the rule... and has actually never been done that i remember (and i dont remember much hehe).

so what should the punishment be?
Dont know. But the only guide is PRECEDENT. So if we go by precedent there's not much to go by... because its not simply that its a never happened thing with no historic precedent. Its a its happened before-to no action, kinda thing.
So here's where the legal procedings come in. The FIA cant just invent a punishment because Niki Lauda says so...

We'll have a ruling soon enough, and then we can talk more about it.

Mora like: we can talk all we want about it... until there's a ruling hehe

[What's Burning?]

We'll have a ruling soon enough, and then we can talk more about it.

Mora like: we can talk all we want about it... until there's a ruling hehe

You say potatoes...
I was being diplomatic, but imagine that, you and I both came up with different ways of saying the same thing.

I like discussing things with you, we somehow manage to disagree without making the mods angry.

[vaptin]

Wouldn't stake too much on "rumours in the Italian media" anyway. I've heard that phrase before, apparently Ferrari were rushing through a B-spec car at the start of the season, cos the first one was rubbish.

[myownalias]

so what should the punishment be?
Dont know. But the only guide is PRECEDENT. So if we go by precedent there's not much to go by... because its not simply that its a never happened thing with no historic precedent. Its a its happened before-to no action, kinda thing.
So here's where the legal procedings come in. The FIA cant just invent a punishment because Niki Lauda says so...

Maybe a McLaren style punishment, strip Ferrari or all constructor points for the season with the drivers keeping their points, that'd be a fair compromise!

[f1ea]

I like discussing things with you, we somehow manage to disagree without making the mods angry.

Yup. That's the spirit

so what should the punishment be?
Dont know. But the only guide is PRECEDENT. So if we go by precedent there's not much to go by... because its not simply that its a never happened thing with no historic precedent. Its a its happened before-to no action, kinda thing.
So here's where the legal procedings come in. The FIA cant just invent a punishment because Niki Lauda says so...

Maybe a McLaren style punishment, strip Ferrari or all constructor points for the season with the drivers keeping their points, that'd be a fair compromise!

That's some sort of understandable punishment; but the problem is, the spy issue was a "un-precedented" kinda thing, while this one is widely preceded........... i'm not saying what Ferrari deserve or not deserve, just that its difficult to give an extraordinary punishment on something that already has the precedent of not being punished; and thats quite probably Ferrari's argument.

[What's Burning?]

I like discussing things with you, we somehow manage to disagree without making the mods angry.

Yup. That's the spirit

so what should the punishment be?
Dont know. But the only guide is PRECEDENT. So if we go by precedent there's not much to go by... because its not simply that its a never happened thing with no historic precedent. Its a its happened before-to no action, kinda thing.
So here's where the legal procedings come in. The FIA cant just invent a punishment because Niki Lauda says so...

Maybe a McLaren style punishment, strip Ferrari or all constructor points for the season with the drivers keeping their points, that'd be a fair compromise!

That's some sort of understandable punishment; but the problem is, the spy issue was a "un-precedented" kinda thing, while this one is widely preceded........... i'm not saying what Ferrari deserve or not deserve, just that its difficult to give an extraordinary punishment on something that already has the precedent of not being punished; and thats quite probably Ferrari's argument.

Ferrari made it not so easy to turn a blind eye on this by doing 80 not 75.

[myownalias]

Ferrari need to be seen to be punished, the problem is two fold; the team order was pretty obvious to all given the radio communication and Jean Todt can not be seen to be favouring Ferrari given his past history with the Maranello based team! If no serious sanctions are handed down this time then the rule needs to be scraped!

[The Immortal Dragon]

no, it's not the same.
Because a speeding limit is something that makes sense. That rule doesn't.
Also.. there are team orders (different types of team orders, maybe, but team orders nonetheless) in *each and every race* but nobody gets ever punished. Which is fine.
But then *I* do it for the *first* place of the GP in a more obvious way, and now I did something wrong for the sport? Are you kidding me?

There are all kinds of rules on the books that don't make sense and people break all the time. People have been convicted of sodomy which is still illegal in a lot of countries.

Did you actually read the rest of the post?

Yes I certainly did, and that's why I clarified it for you since you're arguing that the rule is stupid therefor you shouldn't see any consequences. The legal system works more like my example. What you should be arguing is to have the rule changed next year, that argument would hold water.

Ok, forget that I said the rule was stupid.
Why does Ferrari have to pay for something everybody does during each weekend?

[What's Burning?]

Ok, forget that I said the rule was stupid.
Why does Ferrari have to pay for something everybody does during each weekend?

Ugh, now you're asking a much more difficult question, since the answer is all about perception and any answer is bound to be subjective and biased based on your pov.

Why do you find some girls pretty and others ugly if they all have a nose, and eyes and lips... you get the point. (I am not insensitive to the women on this forum, the same ugly analogy applies to men.)

In this case the perception is that Ferrari's dismissal of the rule that everybody dismisses is perceived by most to be pretty damn ugly.

[elfinitty]

I am happy that they have to pay fine.That wasnt something they were supposed to do.Maybe they have a little right but this was really mean.What they are saying to Stewards was unacceptable

[The Immortal Dragon]

Ok, forget that I said the rule was stupid.
Why does Ferrari have to pay for something everybody does during each weekend?

Ugh, now you're asking a much more difficult question, since the answer is all about perception and any answer is bound to be subjective and biased based on your pov.

Why do you find some girls pretty and others ugly if they all have a nose, and eyes and lips... you get the point. (I am not insensitive to the women on this forum, the same ugly analogy applies to men.)

In this case the perception is that Ferrari's dismissal of the rule that everybody dismisses is perceived by most to be pretty damn ugly.

But rules and laws shouldn't be about ugliness. And they shouldn't be based on anybody's point of view. *Any* type of team order should receive the same treatment, or the most obvious might receive a more marked penalty (but a slightly more marked penalty only). But it's not right and consistent that everybody gets away with nothing, not even a fine, and Ferrari should get a fine and something else.

[myownalias]

But rules and laws shouldn't be about ugliness. And they shouldn't be based on anybody's point of view. *Any* type of team order should receive the same treatment, or the most obvious might receive a more marked penalty (but a slightly more marked penalty only). But it's not right and consistent that everybody gets away with nothing, not even a fine, and Ferrari should get a fine and something else.

This is the big issue with the FIA rulebook, there's too much ambiguity, rules need to be clear and the punishment set out for each infringement, no ambiguity there!!!

Ultimately I can understand Montezemolo's complaints of hypocrisy up and down the pitlane, no matter how it is said over the radio, one driver blending the throttle to let another pass is team orders, or even if it's a drivers decision as claimed by Ferrari and Felipe Massa, it could still be punished under the same rule, artificially altering the outcome of the race, instant DQ would work for me, if a driver has a problem then fair enough but the team must prove that their driver had a problem! My issue with team orders isn't when one driver is out of the race for the title, my issue is when team orders are issued when the driver ordered to move over can still mathematically win.

[vaptin]

I'm not sure its still an offence if the driver made the decision?