FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Bubbie]

Read my previous posts... I think the WMSC made the right decision. I am not arguing the legal merits of the case, because just like other supposed uses of team orders, this one cannot be proven to the standards that a disqualification would require.

What I am debating about is people trying to re-write history that Ferrari did not use team orders. So which is it Spanky... forget what the WMSC could rule on. Did they use team orders or not. Simple question for YOU on what you think, not what the WMSC could prove.

Also the fact that the cover up of Massa, Dominicali, Smedley and Ferrari lying to the stewards, the media/fans and WMSC is the same as where Mclaren lied about the overtake and handing back of a position and were disqualified from the race in 2009 Australia. Those of you who said they believe this was team orders (whether justified because other people do it or not) What are your thoughts on that?

[spankyham]

Read my previous posts... I think the WMSC made the right decision. I am not arguing the legal merits of the case, because just like other supposed uses of team orders, this one cannot be proven to the standards that a disqualification would require.

What I am debating about is people trying to re-write history that Ferrari did not use team orders. So which is it Spanky... forget what the WMSC could rule on. Did they use team orders or not. Simple question for YOU on what you think, not what the WMSC could prove.

Also the fact that the cover up of Massa, Dominicali, Smedley and Ferrari lying to the stewards, the media/fans and WMSC is the same as where Mclaren lied about the overtake and handing back of a position and were disqualified from the race in 2009 Australia. Those of you who said they believe this was team orders (whether justified because other people do it or not) What are your thoughts on that?

What I think is we will never know with 100% certainty. For me to pass a judgment, and thereby answer your question, would be predicated on me being certain they were either lying or telling the truth.

I can answer that if I was forced to make a judgment, I'd have to accept their stories because there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

I don't quite see this as the same as the McLaren/Lewis lie about the overtake and handing back the position. In that case, there was hard evidence (the recording of Lewis's interview immediately after the race) and the eventual confession of the lie.

Having said all of the above, I accept the WMSC decision. I think their penalty is probably correct as are the reason they gave. My summary is that, whilst Ferrari didn't give a direct hard command for Felipe to move over, their communications put an undue amount of pressure on Felipe and, therefore his decision was too heavily influenced by the information Ferrari were feeding him.

Now, given all of that, I'm firmly in the camp that believes this is a ridiculous rule and I'm hoping it will be completely scrapped, and soon. I agree with McLaren's use of team orders in the past and I agree with Ferrari's use of them as well.

[vaptin]

In terms of Ferrari being punished for lying to the stewards, we don't really know what they said specifically to the Stewards - I'm not sure there's anything against (in terms of rules) them lying to fans/reporters.

But if the WMSC couldn't punish them for team orders, then they can't punish them for lying to the Stewards (which is based on if they actually were proved to have used team orders).