McLaren lose appeal

McLaren lose appeal#24683

By 7UpJordan - 16 Nov 07, 19:45

- 16 Nov 07, 19:45#24683

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 099263.stm

I think Lewis will actually be glad it's over and that he's not been handed the title by default.

"And Mansell was lucky not to be taken off by that RIDICULOUS bit of driving by Alliot!!" - James Hunt
"AAAAAND into the pitlane..... OHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!" - Murray Walker

#24684

By certom - 16 Nov 07, 19:56

- 16 Nov 07, 19:56#24684

the FIA saved its last signs of seriousness...thanks for the news i couldn't have waited anymore!!

ORGOGLIO FERRARI

VOLVO DRIVER

#24689

By cap-dude - 16 Nov 07, 20:24

- 16 Nov 07, 20:24#24689

they couldn't rip the title away from Kimi, can you actually imagine the madness it would create

#24693

By certom - 16 Nov 07, 20:36

- 16 Nov 07, 20:36#24693

i can't!

ORGOGLIO FERRARI

VOLVO DRIVER

#24696

By McLaren Fan - 16 Nov 07, 20:47

- 16 Nov 07, 20:47#24696

No surprise really. I'm actually happy for Hamilton. If he were to have won the title via this it would certainly have been tainted and worth less. If the evidence were of a higher quality I still think there should have been a financial penalty on BMW and Williams.

Ayrton Senna: WDC 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991
McLaren: WCC 1974, 1984, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1998, 1999, 2007
McLaren: WDC 1974, 1976, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1998, 1999, 2008

#24698

By cap-dude - 16 Nov 07, 20:56

- 16 Nov 07, 20:56#24698

I think the probelm was they couldn't prove BMW and Williams used cold fuel, so no hard evidence, no punishment.

But next year, with the new ECU package, things like Fuel Temperture can be montoried, meaning this won't happen again.

When you think about it, could Hamiliton have caught up with the 3 drivers on front of him if they didn't have that advantage. Another big what if to add the many from this season

#24703

By Cillit Bang - 16 Nov 07, 23:24

- 16 Nov 07, 23:24#24703

I think the probelm was they couldn't prove BMW and Williams used cold fuel, so no hard evidence, no punishment.

I have to say that made me chuckle.

If that is the FIA's mindset, could somebody point out the hard evidence that showed Mclaren used Ferrari parts on their car when they made that ruling way back in September?

Murray Walker

"I don't make mistakes. I make prophecies which immediately turn out to be wrong"

#24704

By f1usa - 16 Nov 07, 23:24

- 16 Nov 07, 23:24#24704

Why was Ferrari even allowed at the hearing.

#24708

By racechick - 17 Nov 07, 01:15

- 17 Nov 07, 01:15#24708

Because one third of the FIA are Ferrari

Not that I would have wanted this taken from Kimi-nor would Lewis. Kimi and Lewis are racers who get dragged into this political crap

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abe Lincoln

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. Abe Lincoln

#24710

By McLaren Fan - 17 Nov 07, 01:52

- 17 Nov 07, 01:52#24710

Why was Ferrari even allowed at the hearing.

To be fair, they have a big interest in the case for the drivers' title was on the line. I found this segment of an article from autosport.com:

An international appeal court began a hearing on Thursday that will either confirm Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen as 2007 Formula One champion or hand the title to McLaren's Lewis Hamilton.

The four judges met in London with representatives of the two teams, as well as BMW Sauber and Williams, to hear an appeal by McLaren against a stewards' decision at the season-ending Brazilian Grand Prix last month.

It really shows what the case was about given that BMW and Williams were the afterthoughts.

If the FIA say the evidence was not good enough ( :wink:

) then I would assume from that the rule is pretty clear: if your fuel is proven to be cool then you will be penalised.

Last edited by McLaren Fan on 17 Nov 07, 15:19, edited 1 time in total.

Ayrton Senna: WDC 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991
McLaren: WCC 1974, 1984, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1998, 1999, 2007
McLaren: WDC 1974, 1976, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1998, 1999, 2008

#24715

By f1usa - 17 Nov 07, 03:40

- 17 Nov 07, 03:40#24715

This was the 2nd hearing of three to involve McLaren. Coming out of the Paris WMSC hearing on 13-09-2007, Ron Dennis knew there would be a Renault spygate hearing in the future. The cool fuel issue arose, RD appealed which is his right. Everybody including Ron Dennis knew beforehand, Kimi's WDC title was secure. Ron Dennis is showing us case examples where MM and the WMSC abandon Precedent and Principle and substitute bias, favoritism and corruption. Do it enough times, and the EU may take notice.

#24726

By darwin dali - 17 Nov 07, 04:47

- 17 Nov 07, 04:47#24726

I think the probelm was they couldn't prove BMW and Williams used cold fuel, so no hard evidence, no punishment.

I have to say that made me chuckle.

If that is the FIA's mindset, could somebody point out the hard evidence that showed Mclaren used Ferrari parts on their car when they made that ruling way back in September?

McLaren weren't convicted on those grounds - that might still happen down the road though...

Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point.

#24734

By 8-ball - 17 Nov 07, 11:39

- 17 Nov 07, 11:39#24734

No surprise really. I'm actually happy for Hamilton. If he were to have won the title via this it would certainly have been tainted and worth less. If the evidence were of a higher quality I still think there should have been a financial penalty on BMW and Williams.

a financial penalty and lose their constructor points from the race it would have been fair and consistent with what they did to Mclaren earlier in the year

#24736

By Woodchip - 17 Nov 07, 12:00

- 17 Nov 07, 12:00#24736

Woohoo!!! Everyone can use subzero fuel, so long as their sensor is "playing up". Nice precedent there FIA. Excellent, unbias ruling as always.

I have nothing more to say on the matter (for the time being)

#24739

By bud - 17 Nov 07, 12:22

- 17 Nov 07, 12:22#24739

No surprise really. I'm actually happy for Hamilton. If he were to have won the title via this it would certainly have been tainted and worth less. If the evidence were of a higher quality I still think there should have been a financial penalty on BMW and Williams.

a financial penalty and lose their constructor points from the race it would have been fair and consistent with what they did to Mclaren earlier in the year

this wasnt a espionage case so wheres the similarity?

The decision was always going to be this one, all the powers that be put their foot down on this one (*cough*Bernie)

what ive found ironic is the reaction of Ferrari fans, they had no drama what so ever in winning the constructor title through off track means yet they are calling McLaren hypocrits. McLaren have said they didnt want Lewis to win the title in this manner but i think the reason for the appeal is this, there are a couple of sayings that ring true....
when in rome do as the romans do... and, what goes around comes around!

FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum