FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Hammer278]

I don't think the teams have to wait for a call from Pirelli. They have a decision that clearly states Pirelli's obligation to provide all teams with the same offer to test with their 2013 car and current drivers. I think the only question mark would be whether the teams feel the young driver test would be more valuable than a test with current drivers, at a closed track and obtaining the data from Pirelli.

Well, as so many people have pointed out, it is not Mercs data, it is Pirelli's data and Pirelli has an obligation to provide the same data to all teams. Be interesting to see if any other teams will seek the data, but if it was me, I'd certainly be asking for it now.
If another team did decide to do the test with current drivers and run by Pirelli, Merc might likewise put their hands out for that data as might other teams.

For the bolded part, could you point me to a link? Because I fail to see this anywhere.

As for the confidential info, Pirelli had passed it down to Mercedes marked 'confidential'. Mercedes has possession of the data and can choose to share/distribute it if they want since they were officially involved in the test. But it wasn't conducted by them. Big difference. If they are forced to share this data, it would have clearly been outlined by the Tribunal as part of the Tribunal results. Which it wasn't.

[What's Burning?]

Is Pirelli providing the data gathered during the Ferrari test as well?

I disagree with your interpretation Spanky. I was right about the smell of roses, I think I'm right in that NO team will try to do anything that isn't completely within the current and likely to be redefined Pirelli testing process.

[What's Burning?]

If we're keeping score here guys it's something like Ferrari 27, red bull 5 or 6 and Mercedes 1. Nothing to get all that excited about when we look at the big picture.

[spankyham]

Mercedes got off lightly, could and possibly should have lost some constructors points.

So should have the scuderia.

Why should they? the Ferrari test was legal, but right now I bet they regret not doing it with a 2013 car if that is all they would have got!

for one they ran over 1000 Km is that not against the regulations? They also ran their own tests for portions of their "secret" testing, for during times without the involvement of Pirelli. They didn't use a 2013 car but they did test plenty of other things.

That was a claim made but unsubstantiated by the decision. There is no substance to this.

I understand why Ferrari fans, and Red Bull fans may not like the ruling, but get over it.

I'm not, I think the tribunal did a good job and the decision to me, seems well considered and clear.

Plenty of times have other teams gotten away with skirting the regulations and the door to that loophole in now closed. Just because Ferrari didn't get it and you don't like it, is not a "legal" reason.

Exactly right, and, just as when any team opens a loophole, all the other teams are entitled to exploit that same loophole in the same way - as long as they think its worthwhile. The Merc DDRS last year is a good example. Other teams eventually worked out what Merc was doing, some decided to exploit it other decided against it. The same will happen with this loophole that Merc has opened.

This story is done folks. Next controversy coming up in a few races I'm sure. it's just how the sport goes.

Experience tells me we might not have to wait that long

[spankyham]

Is Pirelli providing the data gathered during the Ferrari test as well?

No, but there was no obligation by the FiA to provide data from testing with 2 year old cars. The additional stipulation came from the FiA specifically to the circumstance of a current car being used.

I disagree with your interpretation Spanky. I was right about the smell of roses, I think I'm right in that NO team will try to do anything that isn't completely within the current and likely to be redefined Pirelli testing process.

I think the decision is fine and acceptable, I have zero problems with it. As to other teams doing the same, I think, exactly as with every other loophole, once it has been exposed, it is up to the other teams to decide to copy or not. That decision will be based on whether they feel there is benefit or not. But certainly it will be being considered by Red Bull, Ferrari et al. And, if they decide to do such tests and do it better and get more out of it, then good luck to them.

[What's Burning?]

Is Pirelli providing the data gathered during the Ferrari test as well?

No, but there was no obligation by the FiA to provide data from testing with 2 year old cars. The additional stipulation came from the FiA specifically to the circumstance of a current car being used.

Which the tribunal indicated was a mistake and clearly against the rules. It was the FiA's mistakenly allowing Mercedes to proceed with such a test. The ruling clearly states that if the FiA had alerted Mercedes and Pirelli that they could not proceed with that test, that they would not have gone forward with it. In other words, this isn't a loop hole, it's simply a mistake made by the FiA officials interpreting their own rules that precipitated the series of events.

It is not a cart blanch to other teams to go forth and do as they wish. In season testing is still not allowed unless it's one of these specific Pirelli tests. If Pirelli feel they've gathered the data nessesary to fix their issues, there is no need for further testing. Pirelli as evidence put forth that they asked in a blanket statement for all teams to participate. Obviously they received a response only from Ferrari and Red Bull. It was Mercedes' use of the 2013 car that was deemed illegal and are subsequently being punished for using... albeit at a "reduced rate" because they asked and were approved to do so by the FiA itself.

There is no legal justification to repeat an accidental approval made by the FiA, on the contrary the ruling clearly states that it was illegal.

I disagree with your interpretation Spanky. I was right about the smell of roses, I think I'm right in that NO team will try to do anything that isn't completely within the current and likely to be redefined Pirelli testing process.

I think the decision is fine and acceptable, I have zero problems with it. As to other teams doing the same, I think, exactly as with every other loophole, once it has been exposed, it is up to the other teams to decide to copy or not. That decision will be based on whether they feel there is benefit or not. But certainly it will be being considered by Red Bull, Ferrari et al. And, if they decide to do such tests and do it better and get more out of it, then good luck to them.

again, what you're calling a loophole, the FiA and the Tribunal called a mistake by certain FiA representatives and their legal counsel and there is nothing that forces them to provide that to the other teams.

When a super market finds an item priced wrong (below cost) they don't continue selling that item to other people, they're not legally bound to sell it for that once they go back and change the price. There is no legal precedence to sell that item for that price to anyone else goring forward.

[spankyham]

I don't think the teams have to wait for a call from Pirelli. They have a decision that clearly states Pirelli's obligation to provide all teams with the same offer to test with their 2013 car and current drivers. I think the only question mark would be whether the teams feel the young driver test would be more valuable than a test with current drivers, at a closed track and obtaining the data from Pirelli.

Well, as so many people have pointed out, it is not Mercs data, it is Pirelli's data and Pirelli has an obligation to provide the same data to all teams. Be interesting to see if any other teams will seek the data, but if it was me, I'd certainly be asking for it now.
If another team did decide to do the test with current drivers and run by Pirelli, Merc might likewise put their hands out for that data as might other teams.

For the bolded part, could you point me to a link? Because I fail to see this anywhere.

It's covered quite a few times, here are some:-
Summary of the background facts
1, Part 2, 4.3 The PROVIDER undertakes to treat all COMPETITORS equally with respect to anything which affects the performance of the cars.

4 However I think this is always subject to Pirelli complying strictly with its obligation to treat equally all competitors as per clause 4.2 of the supply agreement. This means that Pirelli shall invite all competitors to participate in such tests, and be able at any time to demonstrate that it has done so.”

Findings by the Tribunal
4 (vi) No other team was aware of the fact that such advantage might be, or had been, obtained, notwithstanding the assurance which had been given by Paul Hembery to Charlie Whiting, as set out in paragraph 5 above;

As for the confidential info, Pirelli had passed it down to Mercedes marked 'confidential'. Mercedes has possession of the data and can choose to share/distribute it if they want since they were officially involved in the test. But it wasn't conducted by them. Big difference. If they are forced to share this data, it would have clearly been outlined by the Tribunal as part of the Tribunal results. Which it wasn't.

I'm not saying Merc has to share the data, they do not. It is Pirelli that must share the data Merc has no say over that data because it is the property of Pirelli - remember how everyone went to great lenghts to point out it wasn't Merc doing the testing, it was Pirelli. Ergo the data belongs to Pirelli and Pirelliu has an obligation to share tire information data they possess equally amongst all teams.

[spankyham]

Which the tribunal indicated was a mistake and clearly against the rules. It was the FiA's mistakenly allowing Mercedes to proceed with such a test. The ruling clearly states that if the FiA has alerted Mercedes and Pirelli that they could not proceed with that test, that they would not have gone forward with it. In other words, this isn't a loop hole, it's simply a mistake made by the FiA that precipitated the series of events.

It is not a cart blanch to other teams to go forth and do as they wish. In season testing is still not allowed unless it's one of these specific Pirelli tests. If Pirelli feel they've gathered the data nessesary to fix their issues, there is no need for further testing. Pirelli as evidence put forth that they asked in a blanket statement for all teams to participate. Obviously they received a response only from Ferrari and Red Bull. It was Mercedes' use of the 2013 car that was deemed illegal and are subsequently being punished for using... albeit at a "reduced rate" because they asked and were approved to do so by the FiA itself.

There is no legal justification to repeat an accidental approval made by the FiA, on the contrary the ruling clearly states that it was illegal.

It is a mistake with a defined penalty. The other teams can do the crime and then do the time, but, the precedent is set in terms of the punishment that will be meted out to a team that makes this mistake. That is why I said the teams have to weigh up the value of doing the young drivers test in public against doing a test with their 2013 car and current drivers at a closed circuit and suffer the same punishment as Merc did. You can't give one guy a $20 fine for speeding then decide to fine the next guy double or triple.

again, what you're calling a loophole, the FiA and the Tribunal called a mistake by certain FiA representatives and their legal counsel and there is nothing that forces them to provide that to the other teams.

When a super market finds an item priced wrong (below cost) they don't continue selling that item to other people, they're not legally bound to sell it for that once they go back and change the price. There is no legal precedence to sell that item for that price to anyone else goring forward.

Actually there is an obligation in the example you've given. It is called an "invitation to treat" and if that is done by a Supermarket, and advertised - i.e. a price is shown, they actually must continue selling it at the price, this does vary from country to country, but, I'm fairly certain in France, which would be the ultimate court of jurisdiction, this is a very strongly established maxim.

[What's Burning?]

I didn't say advertised price for a reason. I mention listed price, as in the price listed on the shelf for the item, and the price the bar code registered when scanned. If it was advertised it would have to end that ad and that takes time and I agree the store is stuck selling it for that.

In this case the FiA would have to have in their regulations and "advertisement" of sorts that you may be able to do these tests with a 2013 spec car if... xyz conditions; Likewise for Pirelli's regulations. However It doesn't say that, and the reason we're here is because an FiA lawyer told Charlie that it could be interpreted that way so go ahead and let them. That lawyer was shown to be incorrect in his interpretation. So once the FiA now goes and clarifies the wording of their regulations as they often do in season that door is closed to all other teams. Legally so.

[What's Burning?]

BTW spanky, you're stupid and ugly. Just so we make this a personal attack rather than a civil discussion of the topic at hand.

[spankyham]

BTW spanky, you're stupid and ugly. Just so we make this a personal attack rather than a civil discussion of the topic at hand.

ROFL, thats a mirror you're looking at mate

[What's Burning?]

BTW spanky, you're stupid and ugly. Just so we make this a personal attack rather than a civil discussion of the topic at hand.

ROFL, thats a mirror you're looking at mate

Ouch!

[1Lemon]

Pirelli have to make sure they do not give Mercedes an unfair competitive advantage, wasn't that part of the result that came out the tribunal?

So on this rare occasion I have to say I agree with Spankyham about one thing, Pirelli should give that data to the other teams.

[spankyham]

I didn't say advertised price for a reason. I mention listed price, as in the price listed on the shelf for the item, and the price the bar code registered when scanned. If it was advertised it would have to end that ad and that takes time and I agree the store is stuck selling it for that.

In this case the FiA would have to have in their regulations and "advertisement" of sorts that you may be able to do these tests with a 2013 spec car if... xyz conditions; Likewise for Pirelli's regulations. However It doesn't say that, and the reason we're here is because an FiA lawyer told Charlie that it could be interpreted that way so go ahead and let them. That lawyer was shown to be incorrect in his interpretation. So once the FiA now goes and clarifies the wording of their regulations as they often do in season that door is closed to all other teams. Legally so.

The FiA rules and regs are well advertised, and have a clear period, ie the complete season. Any interpretations, particularly those with implementation aspects are precedents. The fact that there is a mistake would not change the obligation to treat the mistake the same way. Therefore, I think teams like Red Bull could confidently go ahead and require Pirelli to give them the same testing opportunity they gave Mercedes as is well established in the tribunal decision. The teams would also have to accept the same sanctions as Mercedes was given.

However, if a team demands the data from Pirelli (from the Merc test) and gets it then I don't think any team would choose to do the same test.

[What's Burning?]

But that has nothing to do with the case brought forth to the Tribunal. If Mercedes had used a 2011 spec car they wouldn't have gotten any advantage as they same thing was do during the Ferrari test I'm sure.

I agree that Mercedes (inadvertently) gained an advantage and they're being made to pay the price for that by forgoing the YDT. If the data is shared with other teams, then Mercedes would have to be allowed to take part in those tests. The tribunal felt that whatever advantage was gained is more than made up by the loss of the upcoming test.