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

[nimoraca]

Two separate major problems have occurred this season. First is the inconsistency regarding stewarding. The second is breaking of the sporting code by organization that is suppose to be enforcing it.
The first is a problem in itself, but of lesser importance, since no amount of additional rules would ever produce "absolutely consistent" results.
The second one however is a major issue. It is quite clear that "overriding authority over the use of the safety car" means the authority when to use the safety car, not the actual procedure how safety car is deployed. Its like in football, there are some rules that specify what action warrants a penalty, but it will always be at the referees discretion to decide for the penalty or not. But once a penalty is called, there is no more room for interpretation of how it needs to be executed, meaning, the ball has to be placed at the specific location, the goalkeeper has to stay behind the goal line... Those are not open for interpretation.
That's why all this has been sickening. It would have been sickening if it was reversed between Hamilton and Max.
For the people that cheer for Max, he is a fully deserving champion, most people do not question that. But standing here and saying that this kind of behavior by the FIA is OK just because it helped your driver is strange to say the least.

[nimoraca]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

[f1jcw]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

[Starkblood80]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

[timorous]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

He is in an FIA holding cell until Merc decide what to do with the appeal. They don't want him shooting himself or the FIA in the foot.

EDIT. Any more than they already have.

[f1jcw]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

Not that I have heard. Probably gone into hiding hoping it will die down.

[dans79]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

I pointed that out right after the stewards findings were released. My believe is n0 one wants to respond because the RD is indirectly saying the only to drivers that mattered where P1 & P2, and thats is a problem all by itself.

[101FlyingDutchman]

Two separate major problems have occurred this season. First is the inconsistency regarding stewarding. The second is breaking of the sporting code by organization that is suppose to be enforcing it.
The first is a problem in itself, but of lesser importance, since no amount of additional rules would ever produce "absolutely consistent" results.
The second one however is a major issue. It is quite clear that "overriding authority over the use of the safety car" means the authority when to use the safety car, not the actual procedure how safety car is deployed. Its like in football, there are some rules that specify what action warrants a penalty, but it will always be at the referees discretion to decide for the penalty or not. But once a penalty is called, there is no more room for interpretation of how it needs to be executed, meaning, the ball has to be placed at the specific location, the goalkeeper has to stay behind the goal line... Those are not open for interpretation.
That's why all this has been sickening. It would have been sickening if it was reversed between Hamilton and Max.
For the people that cheer for Max, he is a fully deserving champion, most people do not question that. But standing here and saying that this kind of behavior by the FIA is OK just because it helped your driver is strange to say the least.

Can you show me a post that actually spells out that the behaviour of the FIA is OK? I would say the absolute vast majority sees the flaws in the decision made. And this level of intervention personally has little place in this sport.

But again, according to the stewards he acted within his remit as race director based on his role within the structure and the “powers” afforded to him by how his role is defined. Do I LIKE it? Hell no. Which is why there needs to be a clear out/re write as the statutes/definitions/role limitations have been shown to be majorly deficient. Equally the leaning on officials and trying to influence the race result is shameful behaviour. It was in Ferrari times, and it is so now. Masi hasn’t been firm enough and taken no action, even though he must have known it restricts his ability to function in his role under pressure

[Tom145145]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

Yes, by saying (paraphrasing) he can do what he likes with the safety car. It was all to let them race to the flag, forgetting that this wasn’t just a head to head race between Max and Lewis like at the RoC. Just watch Strolls last lap onboard, I’m surprised that there wasn’t a last lap crash it was pandemonium.

[Starkblood80]

That’s the thing everyone is asking questions on (even the drivers) but no one has answers on.

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

Yes, by saying (paraphrasing) he can do what he likes with the safety car. It was all to let them race to the flag, forgetting that this wasn’t just a head to head race between Max and Lewis like at the RoC. Just watch Strolls last lap onboard, I’m surprised that there wasn’t a last lap crash it was pandemonium.

Do you happen to have a link to strolls last lap onboard?

[Tom145145]

Has Masi himself come out and justified his decision?

Yes, by saying (paraphrasing) he can do what he likes with the safety car. It was all to let them race to the flag, forgetting that this wasn’t just a head to head race between Max and Lewis like at the RoC. Just watch Strolls last lap onboard, I’m surprised that there wasn’t a last lap crash it was pandemonium.

Do you happen to have a link to strolls last lap onboard?

It’s on p157 of this thread near the bottom.

[f1jcw]

Two separate major problems have occurred this season. First is the inconsistency regarding stewarding. The second is breaking of the sporting code by organization that is suppose to be enforcing it.
The first is a problem in itself, but of lesser importance, since no amount of additional rules would ever produce "absolutely consistent" results.
The second one however is a major issue. It is quite clear that "overriding authority over the use of the safety car" means the authority when to use the safety car, not the actual procedure how safety car is deployed. Its like in football, there are some rules that specify what action warrants a penalty, but it will always be at the referees discretion to decide for the penalty or not. But once a penalty is called, there is no more room for interpretation of how it needs to be executed, meaning, the ball has to be placed at the specific location, the goalkeeper has to stay behind the goal line... Those are not open for interpretation.
That's why all this has been sickening. It would have been sickening if it was reversed between Hamilton and Max.
For the people that cheer for Max, he is a fully deserving champion, most people do not question that. But standing here and saying that this kind of behavior by the FIA is OK just because it helped your driver is strange to say the least.

Can you show me a post that actually spells out that the behaviour of the FIA is OK? I would say the absolute vast majority sees the flaws in the decision made. And this level of intervention personally has little place in this sport.

But again, according to the stewards he acted within his remit as race director based on his role within the structure and the “powers” afforded to him by how his role is defined. Do I LIKE it? Hell no. Which is why there needs to be a clear out/re write as the statutes/definitions/role limitations have been shown to be majorly deficient. Equally the leaning on officials and trying to influence the race result is shameful behaviour. It was in Ferrari times, and it is so now. Masi hasn’t been firm enough and taken no action, even though he must have known it restricts his ability to function in his role under pressure

Most lawyers have come out and said rules and regulations do not work like that. If there is a rule that overrules all others it has to be explicitly stated

[101FlyingDutchman]

Two separate major problems have occurred this season. First is the inconsistency regarding stewarding. The second is breaking of the sporting code by organization that is suppose to be enforcing it.
The first is a problem in itself, but of lesser importance, since no amount of additional rules would ever produce "absolutely consistent" results.
The second one however is a major issue. It is quite clear that "overriding authority over the use of the safety car" means the authority when to use the safety car, not the actual procedure how safety car is deployed. Its like in football, there are some rules that specify what action warrants a penalty, but it will always be at the referees discretion to decide for the penalty or not. But once a penalty is called, there is no more room for interpretation of how it needs to be executed, meaning, the ball has to be placed at the specific location, the goalkeeper has to stay behind the goal line... Those are not open for interpretation.
That's why all this has been sickening. It would have been sickening if it was reversed between Hamilton and Max.
For the people that cheer for Max, he is a fully deserving champion, most people do not question that. But standing here and saying that this kind of behavior by the FIA is OK just because it helped your driver is strange to say the least.

Can you show me a post that actually spells out that the behaviour of the FIA is OK? I would say the absolute vast majority sees the flaws in the decision made. And this level of intervention personally has little place in this sport.

But again, according to the stewards he acted within his remit as race director based on his role within the structure and the “powers” afforded to him by how his role is defined. Do I LIKE it? Hell no. Which is why there needs to be a clear out/re write as the statutes/definitions/role limitations have been shown to be majorly deficient. Equally the leaning on officials and trying to influence the race result is shameful behaviour. It was in Ferrari times, and it is so now. Masi hasn’t been firm enough and taken no action, even though he must have known it restricts his ability to function in his role under pressure

Most lawyers have come out and said rules and regulations do not work like that. If there is a rule that overrules all others it has to be explicitly stated

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a rule quoted as such. Equally in my profession (aviation) I can vary ANY rule/standing order as I see fit.as that’s the power bestowed on me by the regulator. I just have to be able to justify my actions in court and potentially face criminal prosecution if I can’t. So not something to do lightly but on minor things, this happens on a fairly regular basis. The rules are a framework (this is how lawyers explained it to us). To be used when able, to be varied as required as long as the priorities of actions are justified. The world isn’t a perfect place and neither is flying an airplane

[Roo]

Another thing, why were the cars behind Max not allowed to pass so that Carlos Sainz can have a go at Max if he wanted to. Max appears to be the only guy that benefited from the "selective rule application" which clearly breaks the fairness of the sport.

I pointed that out right after the stewards findings were released. My believe is n0 one wants to respond because the RD is indirectly saying the only to drivers that mattered where P1 & P2, and thats is a problem all by itself.

Whereas I’d say not until he spoke to Horner

[Starkblood80]

Can you show me a post that actually spells out that the behaviour of the FIA is OK? I would say the absolute vast majority sees the flaws in the decision made. And this level of intervention personally has little place in this sport.

But again, according to the stewards he acted within his remit as race director based on his role within the structure and the “powers” afforded to him by how his role is defined. Do I LIKE it? Hell no. Which is why there needs to be a clear out/re write as the statutes/definitions/role limitations have been shown to be majorly deficient. Equally the leaning on officials and trying to influence the race result is shameful behaviour. It was in Ferrari times, and it is so now. Masi hasn’t been firm enough and taken no action, even though he must have known it restricts his ability to function in his role under pressure

Most lawyers have come out and said rules and regulations do not work like that. If there is a rule that overrules all others it has to be explicitly stated

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a rule quoted as such. Equally in my profession (aviation) I can vary ANY rule/standing order as I see fit.as that’s the power bestowed on me by the regulator. I just have to be able to justify my actions in court and potentially face criminal prosecution if I can’t. So not something to do lightly but on minor things, this happens on a fairly regular basis. The rules are a framework (this is how lawyers explained it to us). To be used when able, to be varied as required as long as the priorities of actions are justified. The world isn’t a perfect place and neither is flying an airplane

So the question is, how does masi justify his actions when previously he’s been quoted as saying the opposite and does his justification stand up to scrutiny?