FORUMula1.com

[vlad]

I only feel sorry for the ban on F-duct! That invention was so simple, but so brilliant!

[deMuRe]

I reckon RB will be hurting the most in quali, which means they/SV won't get those poles as easily anymore and in turn will have a harder time during the race. Could make this season a mirror of JB's 2009 championship: first third dominance, then not anymore with few points and towards the end maybe a bit of a recovery to secure the title?

i generally don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but i tend to think this is the main reason for the change. If it really was for fuel saving or being too close to moving aero parts, they should have banned it before the season altogether.

I smell a rat also, probably an idea to keep people interested on the TV side. Nobody will tune in if RBR & Vettel runs away with the Season, Vettel is not Schumacher, he doesn't stir up enough emotion.

I think if Webber were running away with the title people would be more interested, he seems more liked/hated.

[LewEngBridewell]

I reckon RB will be hurting the most in quali, which means they/SV won't get those poles as easily anymore and in turn will have a harder time during the race. Could make this season a mirror of JB's 2009 championship: first third dominance, then not anymore with few points and towards the end maybe a bit of a recovery to secure the title?

i generally don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but i tend to think this is the main reason for the change. If it really was for fuel saving or being too close to moving aero parts, they should have banned it before the season altogether.

I smell a rat also, probably an idea to keep people interested on the TV side. Nobody will tune in if RBR & Vettel runs away with the Season, Vettel is not Schumacher, he doesn't stir up enough emotion.

I think if Webber were running away with the title people would be more interested, he seems more liked/hated.

It's never great when anyone simply runs away with a title. People complained of boredom when it was Button and when it was Schumacher, it doesn't matter who it is. I don't know about Schumacher stirring up more emotion than Vettel, as the latter is considerably more personable.

[deMuRe]

It's never great when anyone simply runs away with a title. People complained of boredom when it was Button and when it was Schumacher, it doesn't matter who it is. I don't know about Schumacher stirring up more emotion than Vettel, as the latter is considerably more personable.

I guess I'm talking about the TV ratings aspect on a deeper level. I think more people are indifferent to Vettel then Schumacher. Yes Vettel is more personable, but with Schumacher you either loved or hated him. You tuned in to either see him win or take pleasure in someone beating him.

I think the powers that be know and feel this, these rule changes are to keep it interesting...

[vlad]

And, all of a sudden, everyone forgot about flexible front wing, blah, blah, blah...

[acosmichippo]

Not forgotten, just given-up-on.

[spankyham]

Getting reminded of the flexi-front nose/wing and people bringing up "other agendas" does make you wonder.

I do tend to agree that other agendas have been running in the decisions. Having RB and Vettel win 2010, especially coming from behind as he did, was a dream result for the powers that be. From the start of the season the FiA knew about the bendy-front of the RB and their extensive use of overrun, but, it really suited them to keep RB competitive, so their agenda was best served by turning a blind eye to the infractions.

I don't think they thought letting RB operate outside the rules would have given them the huge advantage it has, and, now they see people loosing interest as the winner could well be decided in a few more races. So, their agenda is shifting to keeping the competition for the Championships alive. Hence the talk about suddenly deciding to act on the breach Charlie Whiting said he was aware of from the start of the year.

The problem with selectively enforcing rules based on hidden agendas is, you rarely get what you want, and you end up loosing more than you gain. In retrospect had the FiA come out in Australia and said overruns were banned, we would have had a tight and interesting competition with 5 or so guys in contention and the lead in the championships changing after each round.

[What's Burning?]

Getting reminded of the flexi-front nose/wing and people bringing up "other agendas" does make you wonder.

I do tend to agree that other agendas have been running in the decisions. Having RB and Vettel win 2010, especially coming from behind as he did, was a dream result for the powers that be. From the start of the season the FiA knew about the bendy-front of the RB and their extensive use of overrun, but, it really suited them to keep RB competitive, so their agenda was best served by turning a blind eye to the infractions.

I don't think they thought letting RB operate outside the rules would have given them the huge advantage it has, and, now they see people loosing interest as the winner could well be decided in a few more races. So, their agenda is shifting to keeping the competition for the Championships alive. Hence the talk about suddenly deciding to act on the breach Charlie Whiting said he was aware of from the start of the year.

The problem with selectively enforcing rules based on hidden agendas is, you rarely get what you want, and you end up loosing more than you gain. In retrospect had the FiA come out in Australia and said overruns were banned, we would have had a tight and interesting competition with 5 or so guys in contention and the lead in the championships changing after each round.

FIA meet WWE.

[acosmichippo]

I thought that was NASCAR.

[spankyham]

FIA meet WWE.

[darwin dali]

Getting reminded of the flexi-front nose/wing and people bringing up "other agendas" does make you wonder.

I do tend to agree that other agendas have been running in the decisions. Having RB and Vettel win 2010, especially coming from behind as he did, was a dream result for the powers that be. From the start of the season the FiA knew about the bendy-front of the RB and their extensive use of overrun, but, it really suited them to keep RB competitive, so their agenda was best served by turning a blind eye to the infractions.

I don't think they thought letting RB operate outside the rules would have given them the huge advantage it has, and, now they see people loosing interest as the winner could well be decided in a few more races. So, their agenda is shifting to keeping the competition for the Championships alive. Hence the talk about suddenly deciding to act on the breach Charlie Whiting said he was aware of from the start of the year.

The problem with selectively enforcing rules based on hidden agendas is, you rarely get what you want, and you end up loosing more than you gain. In retrospect had the FiA come out in Australia and said overruns were banned, we would have had a tight and interesting competition with 5 or so guys in contention and the lead in the championships changing after each round.

FIA meet WWE.

A bit harsh

[bud]

I don't think there is any conspiracy to favour RedBull.

[acosmichippo]

I don't think there is any conspiracy to favour RedBull.

Perhaps. There is a quote I've heard (forgotten whose it is) that goes something like this: "Don't attribute mal-intent to which you can just as easily attribute stupidity."

[vlad]

The only conspiracy we might have is the one with the race tracks.

[What's Burning?]

I don't think there is any conspiracy to favour RedBull.

For a second there I read that as a conspiracy to fLavor RedBull.