The point would be that it is deemed to be going above the sporting regulations that the FIA have set in place, remembering that the FIA deemed their cars to have passed scrutineering in Australia, and were satisfied that there weremultisync wrote:Ecclestone added that “the money they should have got will get distributed amongst the teams that are racing”.
Yer look at him taking back money falsely obtained by a team who had absolutely no intention to run the car and giving to other the teams who did.Italiano wrote:What a greedy little pixie he truly is. Can he never stop his money grabbing schemes?
Umm not quite seeing your point?
valid reasons out of the team's control that prevented them from qualifying and racing. No punishment or fine was applied to Manor by the FIA, it's the commercial rights holder that has gone above this ruling to mete out a punishment that has seemingly little precedent.
What also appears to be muddying the issue is Bernie and armchair commentator's insistence that Manor have 'falsely' claimed money that was earned by the same team last season, and presenting that personal opinion as 'fact'. The fact is that a racing team was unable to participate in a race but were deemed to have been present and correct to the FIA's satisfaction, yet has been threatened with punishment.
If this is the case, an argument could be made that Williams, McLaren and Red Bull failed to field the two cars they are contractually obligated to race, so they should be punished in a similar manner.