FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[darwin dali]

So, we've heard from all parties at the Tribunal. What do you think should and what do you think will happen on Friday?
Please choose one of the 'should' AND one of the 'will' options.

[What's Burning?]

I wasn't aware of the "deal" Merc offered up to forgo their young driver test. That's smells like what's already been agreed upon by all parties then a few weeks ago. It saves face for the FiA, Pirelli bears no embarrassment and Mercedes really gets off relatively free as they're the last team at the moment that would want to test a young driver at the end of the season. Oh they do get a reprimand... that's like a five place grid penalty for Grosjean when he qualified 19th.

It doesn't quite smell like roses but it's placates everyone but Red Bull which I'm sure will do their own test soon enough.

[1Lemon]

I'm explaining why I hit the button with I explain on it

I think Merc will get a fine and possibly some points deducted, but Pirelli get nothing. IMHO Pirelli have done nothing wrong, they asked teams to do tests, that's in their contract, that's fine; it's not their job to ensure that Merc stick to the rules. Mercedes however did the tests, and could have followed the rules by using an older car and no race drivers, but instead they used a current car with current drivers. As far as I can see the only reason Pirelli are at the hearing is to give evidence for the prosecution to use against Merc.

[What's Burning?]

I'm explaining why I hit the button with I explain on it

I think Merc will get a fine and possibly some points deducted, but Pirelli get nothing. IMHO Pirelli have done nothing wrong, they asked teams to do tests, that's in their contract, that's fine; it's not their job to ensure that Merc stick to the rules. Mercedes however did the tests, and could have followed the rules by using an older car and no race drivers, but instead they used a current car with current drivers. As far as I can see the only reason Pirelli are at the hearing is to give evidence for the prosecution to use against Merc.

Should Ferrari then be punished for using Massa as a test driver?
Should Charlie Whiting be fired for okaying something he had to business to be doing and if he said "I'll get back to you Mercedes" and never did, is that not negligence on the part of an FiA official and is an FiA lawyer saying, well Pirelli does the the right according to their contract to use a current spec car... should he be fired as well?

Not understanding your insistence on ONLY Mercedes bearing some culpability in all of this.

...and so the conclusion is that if Pirelli feel there's a dangerous aspect to a current spec tire and the best way to test would be to use the car that exhibits the symptom of delaminating a Pirelli tire, that they can't? So it's okay to gamble a driver's life for the sake of not seeming to give a team an advange because of a double blind test?

[acosmichippo]

...and so the conclusion is that if Pirelli feel there's a dangerous aspect to a current spec tire and the best way to test would be to use the car that exhibits the symptom of delaminating a Pirelli tire, that they can't? So it's okay to gamble a driver's life for the sake of not seeming to give a team an advange because of a double blind test?

No, that's not the conclusion. The argument is that if Mercedes wanted to use the 2013 car (even if it was by Pirelli request), they should have performed due diligence to notify and invite the other teams to participate as well (even though I disagree since it punishes teams with less finances to test). But they didn't tell anyone anything, which makes them seem a bit disingenuous to me.

Anyway, i thought this is why Pirelli bring test tires to practice sessions for ALL teams to try...

[What's Burning?]

...and so the conclusion is that if Pirelli feel there's a dangerous aspect to a current spec tire and the best way to test would be to use the car that exhibits the symptom of delaminating a Pirelli tire, that they can't? So it's okay to gamble a driver's life for the sake of not seeming to give a team an advange because of a double blind test?

No, that's not the conclusion. The argument is that if Mercedes wanted to use the 2013 car (even if it was by Pirelli request), they should have performed due diligence to notify and invite the other teams to participate as well (even though I disagree since it punishes teams with less finances to test). But they didn't tell anyone anything, which makes them seem a bit disingenuous to me.

Anyway, i thought this is why Pirelli bring test tires to practice sessions for ALL teams to try...

ehem... Mercedes didn't do the test, it was a Pirelli test. Mercedes went above and beyond by asking the FiA representative in the first place. Shouldn't Pirelli have been the responsible party? Without Merc's cooperation there would have been no Pirelli test.

[Hammer278]

Take Mercedes' offer and let them skip the entire YDP, and reprimand the team for not having permission in WRITING from Whiting. Oh and put some manpower/investment into that rulebook and make sure it's IRONCLAD so no more misunderstandings can occur....if they dedicated half the time they did in putting this case together against Mercedes, into the rulebook, I'm sure these 'misunderstandings' are a lot less likely to happen.

[racechick]

Mercedes should get a reprimand at worst. Anything more and they have to drag in Ferrari and make the can of worms even bigger.

Pirelli nothing, they've damaged their reputation enough pandying to the ridiculous demands of Bernie/ FIA

FIA , big tell off!! MASSIVE SORT OUT YOUR RULE BOOK AND STOP ARSING AROUND!!

[myownalias]

I don't care who called the test, Mercedes would not have done this out of the goodness of their heart, they gained some benefit from the test, even if it is just collecting additional data for development purposes. The drivers would know the differences between tyre compounds. Mercedes know they breached the rules, hence their offer to forfeit their young drivers test and accept a reprimand. What should the punishment be; that's to be decided by the people that know the rules inside and out are charged with deciding this case, but I will say that it should be more than forfeiting the young drivers test and a reprimand, might as well hand down no punishment at all!

[racechick]

Yep, agree with the last bit Myown, no punishment would be the best option.

[andrew]

Mercedes should get a reprimand at worst. Anything more and they have to drag in Ferrari and make the can of worms even bigger.

Pirelli nothing, they've damaged their reputation enough pandying to the ridiculous demands of Bernie/ FIA

FIA , big tell off!! MASSIVE SORT OUT YOUR RULE BOOK AND STOP ARSING AROUND!!

Ferrari have done nothing wrong so why on Earth would you drag them into it? Ultimately, Mercedes shouldn't have agreed to the test without the agreement of all the teams and the FiA.

There is nothing wrong with the rule book, it is perfectly clear. As with most rules, regulations and procedures, if you are unclear on something you ask rather than just gloying on and then playing dumb when the excrament hits the fan.

However the solution is simple. Let every other team attend or have the opportunity to attend a test for the new Pirelli tyres.

[myownalias]

Yep, agree with the last bit Myown, no punishment would be the best option.

That's not what I meant and you know it, the rules are pretty clear, no tyre testing with a current car and current drivers, did we ever get any proof that the FiA gave permission? I've not seen any signed documents from the FiA saying it was authorised, not saying there wasn't a signed document but I haven't personally seen it, anyone have a link?

[andrew]

Such a document has only been mentioned as a rumour.

[What's Burning?]

did we ever get any proof that the FiA gave permission? I've not seen any signed documents from the FiA saying it was authorised, not saying there wasn't a signed document but I haven't personally seen it, anyone have a link?

It's a firehose of information to keep up with but this was testimony today...

"We heard this morning from the FIA about details of exchanges between the Mercedes and the FIA as Mercedes sought to clarify the position about whether a 2013 car could be used. Paul Harris in his submissions this afternoon explained exactly what email traffic had gone on between Mercedes and the FIA, and perhaps while conceding that Charlie Whiting wasn't in a position himself to authorise the test, he does say he was in a position to be led to believe by him there was this potential to run the 2013 car.

"Basically Mercedes made the request to run the 2013 car to the FIA, Charlie Whiting then had an exchange with the in-house legal team at the FIA and it's fascinating to hear the email reponse that came back from Sebastian Barnard, who's the FIA's legal advisor. It goes along the lines of 'in my view any such testing could not actually be undertaken by competitors, it would be argued that this was done by Pirelli. Would we be able to take this position?'

"The response from Sebastian Barnard was 'yes we could take this position, it is not an undertaking from the competitor'. So on the face of it if that's some advice that's been given out there it does seem to suggest that there was this potential loophole that it could be a Pirelli test governed by their commercial contract with F1 and it wouldn't involve the competitor Mercedes and they wouldn't be in breach of the regulations."

[racechick]

Yep, agree with the last bit Myown, no punishment would be the best option.

That's not what I meant and you know it, the rules are pretty clear, no tyre testing with a current car and current drivers, did we ever get any proof that the FiA gave permission? I've not seen any signed documents from the FiA saying it was authorised, not saying there wasn't a signed document but I haven't personally seen it, anyone have a link?

No I know that's not what you meant, couldn't resist

Charlie gave permission. Not Mercedes fault if he's piss useless.