FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Matkins]

Beings as every thread on such issues quickly becomes several pages of people taking cheap shots at each other, I just want a fair discussion here where no drivers, teams or forum members are ridiculed or insulted.

So, If it's just a Misunderstanding between McLaren, the stewards and the FIA (as told by Whitmarsh http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74152) what are the possible reasons for McLaren not appealing and just accepting the decision?

[bud]

whats the point of McLaren appealing? do you think they have a case? even if they did like SPA last year do you think the FIA would even bother?

lets just race!

[Gilles 27]

I think they know they got it wrong and that they are guilty. To be honest, I think that 3rd place for them was an epic bonus and they can't have expected to come away from Melbourne with much given their pace. They will probably be aware that there is no evidence that will be convince the FIA to reverse the decision and will not want the matter hanging over another race weekend during which they will want to focus all their focus on improving the car.

In short, McLaren won't appeal because they know they are likely to gain nothing from it.

[FerrariFan63]

IF they lied, or were even economical with the truth, appealing would dig the hole they're in much much deeper.

Assuming transcripts are released, we'll be able to judge this later on.

[bud]

IF they lied, or were even economical with the truth, appealing would dig the hole they're in much much deeper.

Assuming transcripts are released, we'll be able to judge this later on.

transcripts were released already, Ewan posted them in the other thread already in which you posted since!

[McLaren Fan]

What's the point in appealing? For the FIA to say f*** off and slap more fines and legal costs on them.

[Matkins]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

[McLaren Fan]

As wrong as the decision may be, can you blame McLaren? The team has taken a battering in recent years and know that if they continue appealing decisions the penalties are going to become even more severe.

[TheOak]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

Misunderstanding eih? They were specifically asked if a team order to let Trulli pass was given and they denied it. Hardly a misunderstanding now is it?

[Matkins]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

Misunderstanding eih? They were specifically asked if a team order to let Trulli pass was given and they denied it. Hardly a misunderstanding now is it?

I read that they asked if Hamilton let him through deliberately. Hamilton said no. And it seems that Hamilton was disagreeing with his team about needing to let Truili through as it happened. But that aside... my question, which is the title of this thread is; "Why aren't McLaren appealing?"

So, If it's just a Misunderstanding between McLaren, the stewards and the FIA (as told by Whitmarsh http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74152) what are the possible reasons for McLaren not appealing and just accepting the decision?

I've put the word "if" in bold for you so you understand that it's a conditional postulation. You haven't even attempted to answer the question.

[TheOak]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

Misunderstanding eih? They were specifically asked if a team order to let Trulli pass was given and they denied it. Hardly a misunderstanding now is it?

I read that they asked if Hamilton let him through deliberately. Hamilton said no. And it seems that Hamilton was disagreeing with his team about needing to let Truili through as it happened. But that aside... my question, which is the title of this thread is; "Why aren't McLaren appealing?"

So, If it's just a Misunderstanding between McLaren, the stewards and the FIA (as told by Whitmarsh http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74152) what are the possible reasons for McLaren not appealing and just accepting the decision?

I've put the word "if" in bold for you so you understand that it's a conditional postulation. You haven't even attempted to answer the question.

There was no if in the post I replied to and I don't see how this can even be a matter of "if's" when you read the press release:

"During the hearing, held approximately one hour after the end of the race, the Stewards and the Race Director questioned Lewis Hamilton and his Team Manager David Ryan specifically about whether there had been an instruction given to Hamilton to allow Trulli to overtake. Both the driver and the Team Manager stated that no such instruction had been given. The Race Director specifically asked Hamilton whether he had consciously allowed Trulli to overtake. Hamilton insisted that he had not done so."

[scotty]

There's no point them appealing because here it's blatantly obvious that Hamilton did wrong; however, once again, the punishment is harsh.

[Matkins]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

Misunderstanding eih? They were specifically asked if a team order to let Trulli pass was given and they denied it. Hardly a misunderstanding now is it?

I read that they asked if Hamilton let him through deliberately. Hamilton said no. And it seems that Hamilton was disagreeing with his team about needing to let Truili through as it happened. But that aside... my question, which is the title of this thread is; "Why aren't McLaren appealing?"

So, If it's just a Misunderstanding between McLaren, the stewards and the FIA (as told by Whitmarsh http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74152) what are the possible reasons for McLaren not appealing and just accepting the decision?

I've put the word "if" in bold for you so you understand that it's a conditional postulation. You haven't even attempted to answer the question.

There was no if in the post I replied to and I don't see how this can even be a matter of "if's" when you read this post:

"During the hearing, held approximately one hour after the end of the race, the Stewards and the Race Director questioned Lewis Hamilton and his Team Manager David Ryan specifically about whether there had been an instruction given to Hamilton to allow Trulli to overtake. Both the driver and the Team Manager stated that no such instruction had been given. The Race Director specifically asked Hamilton whether he had consciously allowed Trulli to overtake. Hamilton insisted that he had not done so."

Is it so hard to presume that in my second post i'm still postulating from my initial post. The reason why it's called a thread is because what comes later is in relation to what came earlier. This is still not quite to do with my question. There's obviously no doubt in your mind what happened in the hearing and of McLaren's intentions. So I'll just have to assume your answer to my question is something like; "McLaren know they're wrong". Did I get it? It's ok if you do think that. I want EVERY angle on this question.

[Stealthgate007]

resistance is futile...

[TheOak]

A lot of the appeals from McLaren in the last few years have seemed futile from the start. And yet they still pursued them, I beleived because for their own integrity they need to show the public they do not agree with the decision. It seems crazy to me for Hamilton to get DQed over a post race misunderstanding and for them to just go "oh well".

Misunderstanding eih? They were specifically asked if a team order to let Trulli pass was given and they denied it. Hardly a misunderstanding now is it?

I read that they asked if Hamilton let him through deliberately. Hamilton said no. And it seems that Hamilton was disagreeing with his team about needing to let Truili through as it happened. But that aside... my question, which is the title of this thread is; "Why aren't McLaren appealing?"

So, If it's just a Misunderstanding between McLaren, the stewards and the FIA (as told by Whitmarsh http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74152) what are the possible reasons for McLaren not appealing and just accepting the decision?

I've put the word "if" in bold for you so you understand that it's a conditional postulation. You haven't even attempted to answer the question.

There was no if in the post I replied to and I don't see how this can even be a matter of "if's" when you read this post:

"During the hearing, held approximately one hour after the end of the race, the Stewards and the Race Director questioned Lewis Hamilton and his Team Manager David Ryan specifically about whether there had been an instruction given to Hamilton to allow Trulli to overtake. Both the driver and the Team Manager stated that no such instruction had been given. The Race Director specifically asked Hamilton whether he had consciously allowed Trulli to overtake. Hamilton insisted that he had not done so."

Is it so hard to presume that in my second post i'm still postulating from my initial post. The reason why it's called a thread is because what comes later is in relation to what came earlier. This is still not quite to do with my question. There's obviously no doubt in your mind what happened in the hearing and of McLaren's intentions. So I'll just have to assume your answer to my question is something like; "McLaren know they're wrong". Did I get it? It's ok if you do think that. I want EVERY angle on this question.

I'm sorry I forgot you had an "if" in your initial post, obviously I should have gone over all your posts once more before replying to any single post. It's just that all the facts were already posted and it was crystal clear that they did infact lie, so I didn't understand why you would call it a "misunderstanding".

And yes, my opinion is that Mclaren know they got caught in a lie and have to suffer the consequenses.