Belgium 2008 GP - Court of Appeal Thread

[WhiteBlue]

Shir0, you can add to your list that the race director also has authority to report incidents to the stewards which enables the stewards to mete out penalties. That is a very relevant authority, which in this case was abused IMHO.

My beef with this scandal is that Whiting obviously changed his mind after the race and he now says he got cold feet and made the report to the stewards supposedly all by himself and uninflueced by anybody. This conveniently enabled the stewards to use their discretion. You have to believe in father Xmas to buy into this story. The probability is on the same level as Force India claiming they will win the 2009 constructors championship.

[timbo]

For all people who claim that the decision was bad for sport. Imagine that court decided that appeal was admissable. That put a precedent and gives ground for ALL people who are now happy with ANY penalty (which would be ultimately every single case) to go to courts. Imagine someone penalized at qualifiction, and team desides to appeal (it has presedent) should the race be postponed? Or should results of the race deemed "inconclusive"?
Don't you think that team if not happy with stop-and-go somewhere in the middle of the race would bring it to courts? It is clear that any case is unique and there would be something that team would insist it is "special case".
Like it or not, F1 as a sport would work ONLY if stewards are ultimate judges in sporting questions.
F1 needs better stewards? Probably, true. However, if you look at football you may see that even having professional referees does not prevent people from accusing in "buy-out" matches, bias etc. etc.

[gcdugas]

Ryan: 'Do you believe that was okay? He gave the position back.'

Whiting: 'I believe it was. Yes.'

Ryan: 'You believe it was okay.'

Whiting: 'I believe it was okay.'



FIA Appeals Court: "Race Control? we don't need no steeenking Race Control."

[fenix4life]

Like it or not, F1 as a sport would work ONLY if stewards are ultimate judges in sporting questions.

Their still remains a problem when the rules are not clear enough.

Even now the rule is not clear.
What is a turn?
A corner with a number or a braking zone.

Their is just too much room for interpretation and that kills the sport.

[Ray]

Even now the rule is not clear.
What is a turn?
A corner with a number or a braking zone.

Are you a lawyer? Seriously?

[mcdenife]

Ciro wrote:
You can give red cards after the game, and, reasonable exceptions made (mainly, mistaken identity), they are as solid as the ones you exhibit during the game.

I agree Ciro but you also qualified the circumstances (mainly mistaken identity). What you cannot do however is award a retrospective penalty (as it applies to football terms rather than as in punishment terms). And yes mobbing the referees is truly disgusting though I do not see the relevance in this case, no one is mobbing the referee but questioning their impatialitty and professionalism etc and not even on the 'field of play'. In rugby only the captain is allowed to remonstrate with the referee for very good reason and their refs are generally very well respected also with very very good reason. Referees are deserving of respect and that respect doesnt just come being human like everybody else or that they are infallible, but that they are be 'seen' to be fair. Refs have a responsibility to act responsibly and respect their position, not abuse it.

[WhiteBlue]

... Like it or not, F1 as a sport would work ONLY if stewards are ultimate judges in sporting questions......

from a sporting view it was a particular crass misjudgement. the incident had no impact on the outcome of the race result because Kimi crashed his Ferrari completely unaided and after several near misses in the following lap. so had there been any sporting advantage it would have been cancelled by that failure to finish. It was obvious that Kimi was over driving the Ferrari and he would have over driven it regardless of his track position. any referee who wants to be taken serious has to consider that when making retrospective judgements after the race. It follows that the stewards were either incompetent or manipulative.

that was reason enough to claim special circumstances for the ICA to look into what went on. I fully expected them to do so. the ten men involved in this charade should all be fired and never been given any authority in racing again.

[gcdugas]

Axle, I think you have a point, why should Ferrari's lawyer cross examing LH? should this not down to the FIA's prosecutor or brief? Yes Luca was called but as a witness and is therefore entitled to have his lawyer present, for advise. Ferrari benefit, yes but they are neither the plaintiff/defendants or what have you. The appeal is against an FIA ruling or did the FIA consult Ferrari before handing out the punishment? This kinda implies Ferrari instigated this whole mess.
I am no lawyer but I cant see what Mclaren getting caught last year or being under a microscope has to do with a Ferrari cross examination. Or was this a Ferrari ruling, are they now the governing body? At the most and because of the stakes Donskar mentioned, they can make a submission/statement etc as to why the ruling should not be over turned.

BMW who also benefited by the penalty, who also have a stake in the outcome of the ruling, somehow didn't have their lawyer present. The whole thing is not surprising though. Did anyone expect justice and equity when the FIA and Ferrari are involved? Really, this is only to be expected.

A little history ought to clue us all in.

2003... previously FIA approved front tyres are suddenly illegal after certain red cars were lapped in Hungary (WDC title stolen from Mac or Willy, again just before Monza)
2005... Tyre ovens are blankets
2006... Massa blocked in Q3 at Monza by Alonzo who was 2 seconds up the road
2006... Internal mass dampers are "movable aero devices"

[nae]

there is many things that are 'a bit odd' about this case
not least the fact that they had a hearing to decide if the
appeal was valid, after they had heard the appeal

they could have just said that before and had no hearing
(which is what the rules clearly state)

but no they wasted everybody's time
then charged McLaren the costs of holding it

seems entirely fair and even handed to me
not to mention transparent and easily understood

[WhiteBlue]

there is many things that are 'a bit odd' about this case
not least the fact that they had a hearing to decide if the
appeal was valid, after they had heard the appeal

they could have just said that before and had no hearing
(which is what the rules clearly state)

but no they wasted everybody's time
then charged McLaren the costs of holding it

seems entirely fair and even handed to me
not to mention transparent and easily understood

hear,hear! I really miss the ROFLMAO smiley in this forum software.

[gcdugas]

The FIA are not too shy to blatantly heist the WDC title and give it to a Ferrari driver. Does anyone remember 2003 and Michelin-gate? There the FIA had to contradict its own tire measuring system employed since 1998 when the grooved tires were introduced. To further guarantee the title heist of 2003 they dubiously DQ'd Monty at Indy and shut down the biggest threat to Ferrari. So making up the rules as you go along is standard fare for the FIA. And contradicting its previous positions such as the Liuzzi case or a tried and true tire measuring method is no problem for the ever creative lawyers at the FIA.

They can do as they please. Where are the fans going to go? Where are the sponsors going to go? Where did they go after the heist of 2003?

And for the record the FIA can even retroactively take away WDC points from races long afterward. In 1997 Schumacher and Ferrari were stripped of ALL their season's points retroactively, but only when it didn't matter. The point being that even after Brazil this year the FIA can transfer the title to Ferrari should it serve their purposes.

[gcdugas]

I think Jackie Stewart summed it up nicely with the words the effect of the FIA are not in the habit of losing appeals against itself.

Are you forgetting Malaysia 1999 when the Ferraris finished 1-2 and failed post race tech inspection? The FIA "lost" that appeal against itself. It all matters what color the car you drive is.

[wesley123]

I think Jackie Stewart summed it up nicely with the words the effect of the FIA are not in the habit of losing appeals against itself.

Are you forgetting Malaysia 1999 when the Ferraris finished 1-2 and failed post race tech inspection? The FIA "lost" that appeal against itself. It all matters what color the car you drive is.

I agree with you. I still remember hungary 2006 where schuey did cut the track 2 times to keep ahead of someone, he didnt get a penalty for that. Hamilton didnt get any gain of it.
1. he turned in as first
2. while he was about to cut he was at raikkonens barge board
3. he comes over the start finish line behind raikkonen, so i dont see the gain.
The fia makes his name come true, i dont know what they were doing in the 3 weeks cuz they also could say it after the belgium gp.

[mcdenife]

WhiteBlue wrote:
hear,hear! I really miss the ROFLMAO smiley in this forum software

I second that. really hits the nail.

[andartop]

To all people moaning about the FIA conspiring in favour of the red team. To all the people who are convinced this has been going on for years and years. To all the people who think F1 is rotten, dead, sold out. One simple question: If you are so convinced, why keep bothering? If you really believe the things you say, why do FIA a favour and keep following F1? Why keep having it their way? No, really? Do you think McLaren, Mercedes, BMW, Renault and so on would keep spending millions to compete in a championship they know they are never going to win because the organiser conspires against them? Do you think if all the conspiracy theories were true all the people mostly affected by that fact (ie Team Owners and Managers, Constructors, Drivers) would even bother? Would you risk for life as a Driver every weekend to fight a battle you cannot win? Or do you think F1 would survive if all other teams retired and only Ferrari was left racing? Could you please explain at least how come Ferrari spent around 20 years in the dark before regaining the throne since the FIA has been favouring them since time immemorial?
Or do you also think the US secret services were behind 9/11 and Pearl Harbour, that a UFO really crashed in Roswell, that the NY sewage system is full of crocodiles and Elvis still lives?