2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[Tom145145]

I asked a specific question about a specific incident, rather than conflating stay focused the same for the Chem guy

Well maybe then the issue is that you are considering a specific incident in isolation while the problem is systemic. Again, the championship is not decided on singular events in isolation, but on the cumulative of the season. If you have an issue with rule changes under political pressure, fine, I do too - but then at least recognize that there's much more to this than that singular incident that you now feel 'handed' the championship to a particular driver that you do not happen to support. The real issue that rules have been meddled with or loosely interpreted in favor of one team or another all season, and that that as a whole affected the outcome. Stay focused on the real issue, like the 'Chem guy' is doing (or trying to, at least) - rather than on a specific instance while pretending all those other things did not matter.

And there you go again: I think you’ll find any court will look at this incident in isolation and the consequences of that decision. Again my comment stands focus and less conflating

Also I doubt the “I can’t be convicted of this crime your honour as I have done it before and gotten away with it” will go down well.

[Phil]

Does that make it 'fair', though, if he himself benefitted many times from the police looking the other way while pickpocketing others?

I’m not sure i get the analogy. Mercedes isnt (shouldnt be) contesting the WDC or the championship. They are contesting the race result and the circumstance it was finished on. If that alters the winner of the race and therefore as a result also the champion of the season and if that is fair or not, i’m not going to argue, but it’s important to realize and understand what is being contested. I believe every competitor has the right to go through the proper channels to contest a result - it’s nothing new. It just hasnt been done that often (and usually with very low winning odds).

I believe every competitor has a right to compete and race under the rules they all agreed on - if something didnt go according to protocol and those rules, who is to say they are in the wrong to bring those points forward and have a fair trial/hearing?

[El Scorchio]

I'm positively sure that all the herd complaining here about violation of SC rule, for the ethic of the sport etc etc etc
IF ham would have pitted and masi would let finish the race under SC ALL OF YOU here would have made exactly the same annoying noise simply reversed: "fia cannot let a F1 championship the pinnacle etc etc finish behind a SC etc etc Hamilton dominated the race and max robbed it etc etc".

Just one last thing: I don't think mercedes will go on to protest this decision in PARIS or in a civil court. In case, In Paris they have very few possibility of win, In a civil court they have absolutely ZERO possibility. (maybe a court could let mercedes exit formula1 without penalty or even a money refund (very unlikely but not completely impossible)) but a court will NEVER EVER revert the championship result.

For the civil law it is completely immaterial if Masi made an error or not: the final result of a sport event comes out from many different contributions: ability of partecipants, chance, luck, etc etc etc and ALSO errors by partecipants and refeeres ALL this thing are INTERNAL with respect to the final result and are normal events for the law. The only thing that could cancel (and also here NOT revert) the result is if mercedes demonstrates tha MASI has been paid (corrupted) by redbull to deliberately take the wrong decision. so if you think that this is the case you should explicitely state it.

If the rules had been applied correctly, people would of course complain about ending under the safety car, but they would only be moaning as a fan of a team. Right now we are annoyed as a fan of the sport, because the show is now more important than the integrity of Formula 1.

And I think it really needs to be hammered home, this is not about Lewis vs Max, Red Bull vs Mercedes at all. Masi had plenty of options that would have been correct under the rules they race by, and he somehow managed to make new ones. Ricciardo and Sainz have both expressed their concern, and both of them got screwed by Masi's decisions.

You can add Norris, Leclerc and Russell to that list. Perhaps not directly impacted by that decision but certainly concerned by it.

[Starkblood80]

Without due to considration for the job that needs to be done under duress, people can shout for the head of the man incharge. It's easy to do, when an individual has zero experience of being in such situations. This is no different than media and people in Italy that keeps calling for heads from Ferrari and they kept doing it. It has become a norm for some. There will always be tricky situations where a decision maker cannot get it 100% right, which people sitting on couch think, it's as easy as watching Youtube videos in slow motion. Masi hasn't got everything right, but I don't think another person will either. With that experience, one can expect him to be in better situation to manager similar situations, than to put another Cat in the water and then when that struggles, shout for it's head.

So Toto, the team principal of Mercedes has zero experience of “being the man in charge?”
The mental gymnastics you and other posters are displaying in order to defend masi’s decision making because your preferred driver won is quite spectacular to watch.

Hope @hollus is paying attention to this kind of direct attacks on posters. I had an interesting chat with him about my posts. So, hopefully, this one will come up too.

Please feel free to point out which part of my post is specifically a “personal attack”
Good luck.

[DChemTech]

Does that make it 'fair', though, if he himself benefitted many times from the police looking the other way while pickpocketing others?

I’m not sure i get the analogy. Mercedes isnt (shouldnt be) contesting the WDC or the championship. They are contesting the race result and the circumstance it was finished on. If that alters the winner of the race and therefore as a result also the champion of the season and if that is fair or not, i’m not going to argue, but it’s important to realize and understand what is being contested. I believe every competitor has the right to go through the proper channels to contest a result - it’s nothing new. It just hasnt been done that often (and usually with very low winning odds).

I believe every competitor has a right to compete and race under the rules they all agreed on - if something didnt go according to protocol and those rules, who is to say they are in the wrong to bring those points forward and have a fair trial/hearing?

I was mainly targeting the notion that the championship was 'handed' on a single incident, not any concrete contest (or lack thereof) by Mercedes. Additionally, I also wanted to point out that if the result would be overturned, that does not take the controversy around the title away (there are other events that will keep it controversial, and if 'political pressure' is used as an argument to overturn this particular instance, that would only add to controversy). Sorry for any confusion in that respect.

[24000rpm]

I have a question, and this time I want to speak up, after lurking for years.
So why doens't red bull use the following strategy:
Whenever Lewis pull up enough of a gap in front of Vestappan, a Tauro Rosso car would intentionally crash to create a safety car, preferreably after Lewis missed the pit entry ,
In this case, Vestappan had at least 2 chances of jumping on Lewis with fresh tire, or even without fresher tire, he'd defend like crazy. I thought this was the ultimate weapon for a desperate win.

Just saying.

[El Scorchio]

I have a question, and this time I want to speak up, after lurking for years.
So why doens't red bull use the following strategy:
Whenever Lewis pull up enough of a gap in front of Vestappan, a Tauro Rosso car would intentionally crash to create a safety car, preferreably after Lewis missed the pit entry ,
In this case, Vestappan had at least 2 chances of jumping on Lewis with fresh tire, or even without fresher tire, he'd defend like crazy. I thought this was the ultimate weapon for a desperate win.

Just saying.

I think it would be a very see through tactic- particularly in light of Piquet jr and Alonso for Renault, and generally something that's just frowned upon out of principle by the teams- particularly because of the safety aspect of such things. I cannot see a team ever stooping so low.

[Tom145145]

I have a question, and this time I want to speak up, after lurking for years.
So why doens't red bull use the following strategy:
Whenever Lewis pull up enough of a gap in front of Vestappan, a Tauro Rosso car would intentionally crash to create a safety car, preferreably after Lewis missed the pit entry ,
In this case, Vestappan had at least 2 chances of jumping on Lewis with fresh tire, or even without fresher tire, he'd defend like crazy. I thought this was the ultimate weapon for a desperate win.

Just saying.

Because it’s not allowed and would be found and punished like crashgate. Also Franz Tost is a straight shooter who would never get into this kind of thing, they help each other out with the rules.

[TimW]

I have a question, and this time I want to speak up, after lurking for years.
So why doens't red bull use the following strategy:
Whenever Lewis pull up enough of a gap in front of Vestappan, a Tauro Rosso car would intentionally crash to create a safety car, preferreably after Lewis missed the pit entry ,
In this case, Vestappan had at least 2 chances of jumping on Lewis with fresh tire, or even without fresher tire, he'd defend like crazy. I thought this was the ultimate weapon for a desperate win.

Just saying.

That would create suspicion. Therefore they had a Mercedes powered car do it for them.

[Stu]

Looks like Masi won't need to worry too much about his job (for now).

Ross Brawn didn't know whether to be pleased or annoyed: "The decision in the last round is a highlight that can't be topped. Unfortunately, the protest takes a bit of the shine off this final." The Englishman defends race director Masi: "It's not acceptable that team bosses put Michael under such pressure during the race. Toto Wolff can't demand that there should be no safety car, and Christian Horner can't demand that the cars have to lap back. That's at the discretion of the race director. We will stop this contact next year."

Translated with DeepL

Source: https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... iert-2022/

Maybe communication between race control and teams should ONLY be one way?

[jz11]

I have a question, and this time I want to speak up, after lurking for years.
So why doens't red bull use the following strategy:
Whenever Lewis pull up enough of a gap in front of Vestappan, a Tauro Rosso car would intentionally crash to create a safety car, preferreably after Lewis missed the pit entry ,
In this case, Vestappan had at least 2 chances of jumping on Lewis with fresh tire, or even without fresher tire, he'd defend like crazy. I thought this was the ultimate weapon for a desperate win.

Just saying.

there already is a precedent, ask Briatore for details

[Starkblood80]

Looks like Masi won't need to worry too much about his job (for now).

Ross Brawn didn't know whether to be pleased or annoyed: "The decision in the last round is a highlight that can't be topped. Unfortunately, the protest takes a bit of the shine off this final." The Englishman defends race director Masi: "It's not acceptable that team bosses put Michael under such pressure during the race. Toto Wolff can't demand that there should be no safety car, and Christian Horner can't demand that the cars have to lap back. That's at the discretion of the race director. We will stop this contact next year."

Translated with DeepL

Source: https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... iert-2022/

Maybe communication between race control and teams should ONLY be one way?

I think it has been pretty apparent that Masi’s decision making is too easily influenced by team principles, be that Toto or Christian

[aral]

That would create suspicion. Therefore they had a Mercedes powered car do it for them.

Yeah...maybe Toto asked for it as Verstappen was catching Hamilton, and Toto thought that the race would be stopped !
At the end of the day, it was serious mismanagement of Mercedes that caused the problem. They were out thunk ! if they mirrored RBR, they would have won.

[Tom145145]

That would create suspicion. Therefore they had a Mercedes powered car do it for them.

Yeah...maybe Toto asked for it as Verstappen was catching Hamilton, and Toto thought that the race would be stopped !
At the end of the day, it was serious mismanagement of Mercedes that caused the problem. They were out thunk ! if they mirrored RBR, they would have won.

How could they mirror redbull and not lost track position?

[alexx_88]

If you believe for a second that, that race would've been restarted the exact way it had been, when Lewis would've been on new soft/meds in 2nd place, and MV on very used hards, I have a bridge to sell you

You're making a ridiculous argument that's contradicted by what happened this year. If Verstapen was the chosen one then:
1. Lewis would've received a much bigger penalty for Silverstone
2. Verstapen would've been allowed to keep the first place from the overtake in Jeddah.
3. Lewis would've been asked to give the place back after the first lap incident on Sunday.

If we're in the realm of stupid conspiracy theories, Max would've had a better story considering the above than Lewis