FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[LRW]

The teams weren't informed that Mercedes had accepted the offer to test, but they were informed that Pirelli wanted testers. Mercedes accepted,the other teams, apart from Ferrari, didn't.

Mercedes accepted then carried out an illegal test then. I think that is the cause of the complaints, which is why no team complained about the Ferrari test.

I would say no-one complained about the Ferrari test mostly because no-one bloody knew about them.....

[myownalias]

The teams weren't informed that Mercedes had accepted the offer to test, but they were informed that Pirelli wanted testers. Mercedes accepted,the other teams, apart from Ferrari, didn't.

Mercedes accepted then carried out an illegal test then. I think that is the cause of the complaints, which is why no team complained about the Ferrari test.

I would say no-one complained about the Ferrari test mostly because no-one bloody knew about them.....

And if someone from Mercedes wasn't flapping their lips, the Mercedes test would have remained a secret as well!

[vaptin]

Well, lets see if anyone does complain about the Ferrari tests, Ferrari were happy enough to protest it seems, and the FIA didn't take their case to a tribunal.

[racechick]

Yes. Odd that.

[LRW]

The teams weren't informed that Mercedes had accepted the offer to test, but they were informed that Pirelli wanted testers. Mercedes accepted,the other teams, apart from Ferrari, didn't.

Mercedes accepted then carried out an illegal test then. I think that is the cause of the complaints, which is why no team complained about the Ferrari test.

I would say no-one complained about the Ferrari test mostly because no-one bloody knew about them.....

And if someone from Mercedes wasn't flapping their lips, the Mercedes test would have remained a secret as well!

Ha ha. fecking idiot drivers...

[vaptin]

Yes. Odd that.

Presumably because Ferrari were able to show they complied with the rules in ways Mercedes weren't?

The rules are, well, pretty different when you use a 2 year old car. Even the Mercedes lawyer gave an argument the Ferrari test was legal.

[CookinFlat6]

Theoretically, there is nothing to stop one of the teams, say Merc, to now complain about Ferrari and demand sanctions. The FIA would surely be forced to send it back to the tribunal or at least reprimand and remove similar testing priviledges

Maybe I am wrong

[vaptin]

Theoretically, there is nothing to stop one of the teams, say Merc, to now complain about Ferrari and demand sanctions. The FIA would surely be forced to send it back to the tribunal or at least reprimand and remove similar testing priviledges

Maybe I am wrong

There's nothing to stop the other teams complaining, why would they be forced to send it to a tribunal or reprimand them? The tests aren't that similar, some significant different circumstances.

They'd just need to investigate them. They wouldn't be obliged to follow through, unless it was clear they did something that the tribunal had declared illegal when Mercedes did it, but the tribunal blatantly offered "no judgement" on Ferrari.

Anyway, Redbull have even more of a stake in getting Ferrari punished than Mercedes, so lets see if they complain I think.

Ferrari haven't been formally accused of anything, and have offered no rebuttal of defence (yet) probably as well, they don't need to.

Ferrari have had suggestions made by the media, and people on forums saying it is illegal,

[vaptin]

The teams weren't informed that Mercedes had accepted the offer to test, but they were informed that Pirelli wanted testers. Mercedes accepted,the other teams, apart from Ferrari, didn't.

Mercedes accepted then carried out an illegal test then. I think that is the cause of the complaints, which is why no team complained about the Ferrari test.

I would say no-one complained about the Ferrari test mostly because no-one bloody knew about them.....

Also, Ferrari knew about the test when they protested (obviously) so Ferrari seemed to be confident.

[What's Burning?]

Ferrari is mad they left something on the table, Red Bull is mad they didn't think they'd be anything worth while at the table so they declined the invite.

as Baretta would say...

Mercedes did the crime and paid the time.

[CookinFlat6]

Surely it was alleged that they used Massa in a test, just before a GP at the same circuit, actually 'did their own thing' for a while during the test and (my favorite) actually booked and paid for the test facilities.

Therefore as they were not on trial with Merc, and Mercs 'mistake' was of a different flavour, this would be a new chance for the FIA to actually win at the tribunal, which they should want if, as they stated, sending Mercs case was in the interest of sporting fairness to the other teams.

[vaptin]

Surely it was alleged that they used Massa in a test, just before a GP at the same circuit, actually 'did their own thing' for a while during the test and (my favorite) actually booked and paid for the test facilities.

Therefore as they were not on trial with Merc, and Mercs 'mistake' was of a different flavour, this would be a new chance for the FIA to actually win at the tribunal, which they should want if, as they stated, sending Mercs case was in the interest of sporting fairness to the other teams.

I think the rules on testing are different though, when using a 2 year old car that is also substantially different.

Ferrari might be able to come up with very clear arguments as to why it is within the rules, they might even have got the FIAs permission before hand beyond phonecalls, or well, all this stuff we heard might just be nonsense.

Like I said, surely the best judge is how the other teams react, they have the expertise and inclination to chase if something is wrong.

There may be very little chance for the FIA to win at this one.


----

22.1 Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year. The only exception is that each competitor is permitted up to eight promotional events, carried out using tyres provided specifically for this purpose by the appointed supplier, to a maximum distance of 100kms per event.

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 3/fia.html

So it's only "testing" if using a car that is older than 2 years which doesn't conform substantially to the current f1 regulations, Mercedes argue Ferrari's car when they tested this year was legal, and the FIA already looked at that car and test, and seemed sissified too.

So well, all these other rules, it seems, perhaps only apply to "track testing", which Ferrari have a case that well, they didn't do.

Thinking about it, I'm not sure about what I just said above (it's well, accuracy), can you guys quote the regulations you are saying Ferrari breached?

[racechick]

Who determines substantially different? How substantially different? They used Massa in last years test and they tested this year directly before a GP at the same track, thats not allowed. And they requested and ran the test I'd say that is as much of a 'whoops a daisy' as Mercedes, if not more

[vaptin]

Who determines substantially different? How substantially different? They used Massa in last years test and they tested this year directly before a GP at the same track, thats not allowed. And they requested and ran the test I'd say that is as much of a 'whoops a daisy' as Mercedes, if not more

I don't know how substantially different is determined, and well, I asked you to quote those rules, I mean, there's more wording to them than what you just quoted for sure. It says the car must be substantially different not the driver, though one can argue Massa is substantially different to last year

You also use the word testing a lot, I just said, perhaps it isn't considered testing at all.

[CookinFlat6]

There may be very little chance for the FIA to win at this one.


----

22.1 Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year. The only exception is that each competitor is permitted up to eight promotional events, carried out using tyres provided specifically for this purpose by the appointed supplier, to a maximum distance of 100kms per event.

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 3/fia.html

So it's only "testing" if using a car that is older than 2 years which doesn't conform substantially to the current f1 regulations, Mercedes argue Ferrari's car when they tested this year was legal, and the FIA already looked at that car and test, and seemed sissified too.

So well, all these other rules, it seems, perhaps only apply to "track testing", which Ferrari have a case that well, they didn't do.

Thinking about it, I'm not sure about what I just said above (it's well, accuracy), can you guys quote the regulations you are saying Ferrari breached?

Ah I thought 22.1 stated previous or subsequent years, not previous or subsequent year

in that case you are right and Ferrari would just say it wasnt a test full stop

Lets say Merc were to suddenly have a car that had made a massive gain on tyre wear, and they then had a 2 sec advantage and won everything, there would be nothing the FIA could do about that, they could not handicap Merc or give the other teams free testing

It would mirror RBRs flapping front wing scam. Would love to see Horners face if that happened as they must be worried about Merc