FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[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.

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.

The overrun blown diffusers of last year, the rules were clear and yet they were redefined/clarified mid season. This is no different. I understand the case you're making, but it has no legal leg to stand on as is associated with this ruling. There was an advantage gained, and now that advantage was more than lost. So it in fact closes the case.

[darwin dali]

The outcome of all this is me thinks: tempest in a teapot (or for you Brits: storm in a teacup ).

However, there might be some unintended consequences looming - this is not the last we hear about the tire testing issue and teams will be weighing their options as we speak.

[LRW]

Im sorry Spanky, but I disagree with your interpretations of the tribunals findings.

I agree that it states that Pirelli SHOULD of given all teams equal opportunity. But no where does it say that Pirelli now have to go back and give all other teams an equal test. If that were the case, Mercedes would then be at a disadvantage, as they are missing out on the YDT (the sanction that is there to equal out any potential advantage Mercedes gained).

[What's Burning?]

and outlandish comments from Luca di Montezemolo and Dietrich Mateschitz in 3, 2, 1.
I'm also looking forward to the next conversation between Bernie and Ross.

[1Lemon]

and outlandish comments from Luca di Montezemolo and Dietrich Mateschitz in 3, 2, 1.

Dietrich: "They clearly don't want Vettel winning anymore, and are working with Mark Webber."

[spankyham]

and outlandish comments from Luca di Montezemolo and Dietrich Mateschitz in 3, 2, 1.
I'm also looking forward to the next conversation between Bernie and Ross.

I'm sure Helmut will squeeze some nutbag comments out fairly promptly.

[spankyham]

The overrun blown diffusers of last year, the rules were clear and yet they were redefined/clarified mid season. This is no different. I understand the case you're making, but it has no legal leg to stand on as is associated with this ruling. There was an advantage gained, and now that advantage was more than lost. So it in fact closes the case.

I think the overrun would be a case that backs up what I'm saying. If you recall, the FiA got themselves into a bind because they didn't act. Then when they tried to, teams claimed they could not make a change because they had been allowed to run and make changes that made the cars dependent on overrun. The FiA in the end did nothing. The teams came to a unanimous decision. In fact, the FiA made it clear that if a team protested they would act on the protest.

Also, what I've stated does not preclude the FiA making a clarification. What they can't do now, is change what they already have clarified. And what they have clarified is that if a team tests with Pirelli using a current car and drivers the penalty is being barred from the young drivers test and a sanction.

[darwin dali]

LdM: "I'ma verry disappointeda with da outcoma of the Tribunale. As a consequencea I ah thinga we needa allow for teams to runna dree cars!"

[spankyham]

Im sorry Spanky, but I disagree with your interpretations of the tribunals findings.

I agree that it states that Pirelli SHOULD of given all teams equal opportunity. But no where does it say that Pirelli now have to go back and give all other teams an equal test. If that were the case, Mercedes would then be at a disadvantage, as they are missing out on the YDT (the sanction that is there to equal out any potential advantage Mercedes gained).

This is just not acceptable LRW!!

I'm not saying Pirelli has to go back and change anything, my point is that the Tribunal has codified that Pirelli has an obligation to treat all teams equally when it comes to testing with 1 2013 car. What the tribunal has done is made it clear that obligation existed. The tribunal has nowhere said the obligation has ended at a different time to any other obligation or rule for this year. Ergo, the obligation still exists. Whether teams are disadvantaged by the timing of when they chose/or don't chose to run their test is a variable determined by the team. So IMO, Merc will not be able to test again.

I don't think it is such a big deal and teams will have to weigh up exactly how much advantage they might get from doing a test run by Pirelli with their current drivers against doing a test with a young driver where they are running the show.

[spankyham]

LdM: "I'ma verry disappointeda with da outcoma of the Tribunale. As a consequencea I ah thinga we needa allow for teams to runna dree cars!"

dree! Really? That is the worst typed Italian accent I've read this week

[darwin dali]

LdM: "I'ma verry disappointeda with da outcoma of the Tribunale. As a consequencea I ah thinga we needa allow for teams to runna dree cars!"

dree! Really? That is the worst typed Italian accent I've read this week

Well, he does have a bad accent

[LRW]

Im sorry Spanky, but I disagree with your interpretations of the tribunals findings.

I agree that it states that Pirelli SHOULD of given all teams equal opportunity. But no where does it say that Pirelli now have to go back and give all other teams an equal test. If that were the case, Mercedes would then be at a disadvantage, as they are missing out on the YDT (the sanction that is there to equal out any potential advantage Mercedes gained).

This is just not acceptable LRW!!

I'm not saying Pirelli has to go back and change anything, my point is that the Tribunal has codified that Pirelli has an obligation to treat all teams equally when it comes to testing with 1 2013 car. What the tribunal has done is made it clear that obligation existed. The tribunal has nowhere said the obligation has ended at a different time to any other obligation or rule for this year. Ergo, the obligation still exists. Whether teams are disadvantaged by the timing of when they chose/or don't chose to run their test is a variable determined by the team. So IMO, Merc will not be able to test again.

I don't think it is such a big deal and teams will have to weigh up exactly how much advantage they might get from doing a test run by Pirelli with their current drivers against doing a test with a young driver where they are running the show.

Right. Now I see what you are saying. Not sure if I agree. Stuck in traffic so will have a ponder on it.

[What's Burning?]

I think Spanky that the tribunal's finding's that Pirelli had no intent of maliciousness and that it inadvertently gave Mercedes that advantage is the reason why Mercedes is paying (back)the penalty for that by being excluded from the young driver's test. At this point we can argue the definition and pros and cons of the "advantage" but you can't argue that a level has been set. To reward other teams now is to further punish Mercedes, something the tribunal clearly said was unnecessary since it wasn't Mercedes' intention to gain and advantage. In esses, what the regulations clearly say and I agree with you is what was overlooked by the FiA when they told Mercedes to go ahead an use the 2013 car.

I think they've tried to find a zero net sum here and I think that given the situation they've got that. Anything else would simply be tipping the table the other way and the only way I'd agree with your definition of what's fair with Pirelli then handing over that data to the other teams Is if Mercedes then is allowed that young driver test.

[andrew]

I think Mercedes have gotten off rather lightly. I mean who cares about a reprimand? That's like you're Mum waggling her finger at you when you're 5 years old telling not to kick the neighbours cat again. Doesn't really count for sh!t. I was expecting to read Mercedes had been fined or had points deducted. Surprisingly lenient verdict compared with what has been handed out in the past.

In terms of fairness, all teams should be given the opportunity to take part in a 1000km test with the new tyres or the new tyres are scrapped altogether. That way no one can be seen as having gained anything from the test.

Just my tupence worth. Cue traditional flaming.

[Hammer278]

Lol ^ looks like the tike skipped reading the last 3 pages and decided to start at zero all over again.