FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

[e30ernest]

Following accusations from rival teams (but with no team having protested). The governing body (FIA) said it wasn’t confident that it could prove FERRARI had been in breach of the rules. (Material impossibility to provide the unequivocal evidence of a breach).

Which also means it can't prove it didn't breach the rules. And, crucially, Ferrari wasn't able to prove it hadn't broken the rules.

That last bit is the bit that most people, including all Ferrari fans, are ignoring.

If Ferrari could prove they were legal, there wouldn't be an issue would there? They would demonstrate it and the FIA would say ""they're legal". That they can't do so doesn't mean they're legal, it means they're probably illegal but the prosecutor (the FIA) couldn't prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were cheating.

The distinction is subtle (actually it isn't) but it's key to legal proceedings.

If I accuse you of eating the last pie and you say you didn't. I may not be able to prove you ate it, but my 'suspicion' still stands against you, also you may not be able to prove you didn't eat it. So then are you guilty because you cannot prove your innocence? I don't think it isn't being ignored, I think it's difficult to prove you didn't do something if there's no evidence. Surely if no evidence can be found against, evidence to exonerate could also be lacking.

That is a poor analogy IMO. The issue here is of a technical nature. Ferrari should be able to prove the legality of the engine in technical terms (i.e., measurements, computations, simulations) based on the actual engine unit. They for example do not need to prove they are only using x amount of fuel within the regulations, they need to prove how they are able to extract y amount of power given that fuel flow rate (if the issue is indeed in fuel flow).

[kimetic]

That old story. If there is not Ferrari, zero affect on me McLaren is more important than Ferrari. But I don't say ferrari need to go but need to just one another team in every aspect and when they breach the rules they must be penalised. Every team must be same for fia. Williams haas or racing must be same with ferrari or Mercedes. They must gain same when they do same and when penalised it must be same too. Fia is very very bad in that.

Yes I agree, I was commenting on the drivetribe article. And yes it won't happen, but it's there as a weapon to change the sport exactly as you say, so they won't be signing just yet.

[Chene_Mostert]

Which also means it can't prove it didn't breach the rules. And, crucially, Ferrari wasn't able to prove it hadn't broken the rules.

That last bit is the bit that most people, including all Ferrari fans, are ignoring.

If Ferrari could prove they were legal, there wouldn't be an issue would there? They would demonstrate it and the FIA would say ""they're legal". That they can't do so doesn't mean they're legal, it means they're probably illegal but the prosecutor (the FIA) couldn't prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were cheating.

The distinction is subtle (actually it isn't) but it's key to legal proceedings.

If I accuse you of eating the last pie and you say you didn't. I may not be able to prove you ate it, but my 'suspicion' still stands against you, also you may not be able to prove you didn't eat it. So then are you guilty because you cannot prove your innocence? I don't think it isn't being ignored, I think it's difficult to prove you didn't do something if there's no evidence. Surely if no evidence can be found against, evidence to exonerate could also be lacking.

That is a poor analogy IMO. The issue here is of a technical nature. Ferrari should be able to prove the legality of the engine in technical terms (i.e., measurements, computations, simulations) based on the actual engine unit. They for example do not need to prove they are only using x amount of fuel within the regulations, they need to prove how they are able to extract y amount of power given that fuel flow rate (if the issue is indeed in fuel flow).

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

There is absolutely no legal need for them to prove to anyone how they are achieving their performance.

That idea is absolutely juvenile and crazy.
Was any team ever required to disclose their performance achievements?


Should Mercedes disclose how they achieve good tyre warmup/management.

Should RB disclose what training they do to achieve fast pitstops?

Any investigation into legality follows this simple process.

1. Does the item conform to design specifications as set out in the regulation - Y/N

2. Are the required control measures in place as per regulation? - Y/N

3. Are the control measures operating as required by the regulation? - Y/N

4. Does the item operate within the control measures as stipulated in the regulation? - Y/N

If the findings of of all 4 points is yes, then the item is considered legal.

There is no need to prove anything beyond this.
There is no need to prove "innocens"
There is no need to provide performance details, as performance is not regulated.
Feelings of competitors are a not regulations.

Time to close this. "I don't like them therfore they are guiltily." mess.

[mafeotul]

If I accuse you of eating the last pie and you say you didn't. I may not be able to prove you ate it, but my 'suspicion' still stands against you, also you may not be able to prove you didn't eat it. So then are you guilty because you cannot prove your innocence? I don't think it isn't being ignored, I think it's difficult to prove you didn't do something if there's no evidence. Surely if no evidence can be found against, evidence to exonerate could also be lacking.

That is a poor analogy IMO. The issue here is of a technical nature. Ferrari should be able to prove the legality of the engine in technical terms (i.e., measurements, computations, simulations) based on the actual engine unit. They for example do not need to prove they are only using x amount of fuel within the regulations, they need to prove how they are able to extract y amount of power given that fuel flow rate (if the issue is indeed in fuel flow).

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

There is absolutely no legal need for them to prove to anyone how they are achieving their performance.

That idea is absolutely juvenile and crazy.
Was any team ever required to disclose their performance achievements?

Should Mercedes disclose how they achieve good tyre warmup/management.
Should RB disclose what training they do to achieve fast pitstops?

I find the absolute lack of knowledge regarding basic governance and legal process requirements shocking.
I can see why most spend their time providing legal assessment on here, and are not in a courtroom arguing actual matters...
Time to close this. "I don't like them therfore they are guiltily." mess.

Okay, can you please extract the exact phrasing, since you are much more experienced in legal terms, where in both FIA statements Ferrari has been exonerated and the PU is and has been legal. Please quote this.

[e30ernest]

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

That's exactly what I said. If Ferrari were innocent, they could have easily proved they complied with the regulations. The "pie eating" analogy was poor because unlike that example, Ferrari could have used concrete data and examples to prove they complied with the regulations. But They couldn't, hence the settlement.

[nzjrs]

In other words - they have found a way how to store fuel after the fuel flow sensor measuremens.
Actually it was Mercedes who came with the idea to store fuel after measurements, but then the rules was changed and everyone ware thinking that this path/loophole was closed. But apparently Ferrari found a crack in it and exploited it.

Obviously this is just your guess of the exploit. I also note that it's one of the more explicitly illegal approaches.

[kimetic]

The proposal for the breakaway Grand Prix World Championship sure amounted to a lot last time... Not!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Pri ... way_series
https://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns05211.html

I wouldn't hold my breath, as these Grand Prix teams can barely agree on anything as is..

The Formula One Teams' Association have sensationally confirmed they are to form a breakaway series, causing the greatest upheaval in the sport's 60-year history.

Following a meeting of the eight teams that currently form FOTA - Ferrari, McLaren, Renault, Toyota, BMW Sauber, Brawn GP, Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso - they have all declined to enter F1 for 2010.

Despite weeks of negotiations with FIA president Max Mosley, the two bodies have failed to find a compromise, leaving the sport in total chaos.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090622154 ... %2C00.html

Things can happen once without always happening every time, you know. I'll resist the temptation to return your rolleyes. But true of course they won't actually break away; they can though, is the point. That's the basis of this power play. As time goes by with no contracts for next year, chaos will loom once more, watch that space.

[Xwang]

Which also means it can't prove it didn't breach the rules. And, crucially, Ferrari wasn't able to prove it hadn't broken the rules.

That last bit is the bit that most people, including all Ferrari fans, are ignoring.

If Ferrari could prove they were legal, there wouldn't be an issue would there? They would demonstrate it and the FIA would say ""they're legal". That they can't do so doesn't mean they're legal, it means they're probably illegal but the prosecutor (the FIA) couldn't prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were cheating.

The distinction is subtle (actually it isn't) but it's key to legal proceedings.

If I accuse you of eating the last pie and you say you didn't. I may not be able to prove you ate it, but my 'suspicion' still stands against you, also you may not be able to prove you didn't eat it. So then are you guilty because you cannot prove your innocence? I don't think it isn't being ignored, I think it's difficult to prove you didn't do something if there's no evidence. Surely if no evidence can be found against, evidence to exonerate could also be lacking.

For me, the entire situation is simple. Ignoring the absolute shameful PR stunt pulled by the FIA with the first statement, there are two key aspects here which can not be refuted, changed or ignored.

If a governing body uses the term “SETTLEMENT” it automatically involves both parties at a loss of something and at a gain. A settlement cannot be conceived by both parties not having these two key aspect in the matter. Which ultimately proves that Ferrari had irregularities and the FIA had severe structural problems in both managing, enforcing and investigating set issues in a timely manner to produce a conclusive report. Something a governing body should do, regardless of complexity and political positions of both parties involved.

And last but not least. There is another key aspect here. With a small plus one. The complexity of the issue generated a complex answer. Therefore landing the most ambiguous result i have seen in my life when it comes to legality. The FIA has not stated the following line. “The Scuderia Ferrari PU investigation has determined the PU is within regulations”. This is what is missing. Regardless of what fencing side all categories of people involved would like to choose. As long as that statement does not exist, the complete exoneration of the team seems and it is impossible. Given the current situation, and linking both legal terms intelligently used in set statements ( 1&2) by the FIA it is no longer just an assumption that the Ferrari PU (2019) is not fully within FIA’s understanding of the regulations. That is my understanding of the whole mess.

In Malaysia GP 1999, FIA was sure that Ferrari's bargeboards were illegal and DQ them, but then at the appeal court it was proven that FIA had made wrong measurements.
So if FIA has not DQ the Ferrari engine, it means it is not sure that something wrong has ever happened (no definitive prove exists) and in case that it can be proved in valid legal terms in a court.

[mafeotul]

If I accuse you of eating the last pie and you say you didn't. I may not be able to prove you ate it, but my 'suspicion' still stands against you, also you may not be able to prove you didn't eat it. So then are you guilty because you cannot prove your innocence? I don't think it isn't being ignored, I think it's difficult to prove you didn't do something if there's no evidence. Surely if no evidence can be found against, evidence to exonerate could also be lacking.

For me, the entire situation is simple. Ignoring the absolute shameful PR stunt pulled by the FIA with the first statement, there are two key aspects here which can not be refuted, changed or ignored.

If a governing body uses the term “SETTLEMENT” it automatically involves both parties at a loss of something and at a gain. A settlement cannot be conceived by both parties not having these two key aspect in the matter. Which ultimately proves that Ferrari had irregularities and the FIA had severe structural problems in both managing, enforcing and investigating set issues in a timely manner to produce a conclusive report. Something a governing body should do, regardless of complexity and political positions of both parties involved.

And last but not least. There is another key aspect here. With a small plus one. The complexity of the issue generated a complex answer. Therefore landing the most ambiguous result i have seen in my life when it comes to legality. The FIA has not stated the following line. “The Scuderia Ferrari PU investigation has determined the PU is within regulations”. This is what is missing. Regardless of what fencing side all categories of people involved would like to choose. As long as that statement does not exist, the complete exoneration of the team seems and it is impossible. Given the current situation, and linking both legal terms intelligently used in set statements ( 1&2) by the FIA it is no longer just an assumption that the Ferrari PU (2019) is not fully within FIA’s understanding of the regulations. That is my understanding of the whole mess.

In Malaysia GP 1999, FIA was sure that Ferrari's bargeboards were illegal and DQ them, but then at the appeal court it was proven that FIA had made wrong measurements.
So if FIA has not DQ the Ferrari engine, it means it is not sure that something wrong has ever happened (no definitive prove exists) and in case that it can be proved in valid legal terms in a court.

Lime and lemon. The FIA does not have the competence to declare legality aka lost all ability to control and enforce regulations. And this still DOES NOT clear Ferrari’s PU legality in any way.

[Chene_Mostert]

That is a poor analogy IMO. The issue here is of a technical nature. Ferrari should be able to prove the legality of the engine in technical terms (i.e., measurements, computations, simulations) based on the actual engine unit. They for example do not need to prove they are only using x amount of fuel within the regulations, they need to prove how they are able to extract y amount of power given that fuel flow rate (if the issue is indeed in fuel flow).

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

There is absolutely no legal need for them to prove to anyone how they are achieving their performance.

That idea is absolutely juvenile and crazy.
Was any team ever required to disclose their performance achievements?

Should Mercedes disclose how they achieve good tyre warmup/management.
Should RB disclose what training they do to achieve fast pitstops?

I find the absolute lack of knowledge regarding basic governance and legal process requirements shocking.
I can see why most spend their time providing legal assessment on here, and are not in a courtroom arguing actual matters...
Time to close this. "I don't like them therfore they are guiltily." mess.

Okay, can you please extract the exact phrasing, since you are much more experienced in legal terms, where in both FIA statements Ferrari has been exonerated and the PU is and has been legal. Please quote this.

You don't get exonerated, you are found guilty if there is evidence to support.
The default is not guilty.... Untill PROVEN guilty.
That's just how it works. Standard legal requirements.
It prevents prossicution based on feelings, thoughts, bias and vindictiveness.

[mafeotul]

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

There is absolutely no legal need for them to prove to anyone how they are achieving their performance.

That idea is absolutely juvenile and crazy.
Was any team ever required to disclose their performance achievements?

Should Mercedes disclose how they achieve good tyre warmup/management.
Should RB disclose what training they do to achieve fast pitstops?

I find the absolute lack of knowledge regarding basic governance and legal process requirements shocking.
I can see why most spend their time providing legal assessment on here, and are not in a courtroom arguing actual matters...
Time to close this. "I don't like them therfore they are guiltily." mess.

Okay, can you please extract the exact phrasing, since you are much more experienced in legal terms, where in both FIA statements Ferrari has been exonerated and the PU is and has been legal. Please quote this.

You don't get exonerated, you are found guilty if there is evidence to support.
The default is not guilty.... Untill PROVEN guilty.
That's just how it works. Standard legal requirements.
It prevents prossicution based on feelings, thoughts, bias and vindictiveness.

Okay, one way or another, therefore the entire blame, for utter incompetence and vagueness in such a sensitive matter, is the FIA. Where does that leave Ferrari then?

[Schumix]

Ferrari have been in Formula One longer than any other team. When someone mentions F1 today, one of the first things people think of is Ferrari.
I should point out that I am a big Ferrari fan, but I am a fan of the sport more. As a fan, you love it when all the teams are fighting for the same positions and there’s no way of knowing who will come out on top – think Germany and Brazil last year. I accept that some will argue (quite possibly correctly) that, without Ferrari to keep them in check, Mercedes could continue to dominate in the hybrid era. Although hopefully, the more level field provided by the budget cap will mitigate this possibility and the dissemination of the Ferrari team personnel across the remaining teams would raise the levels of some teams

https://drivetribe.com/p/is-it-time-for ... organic_F1

The Seven, or 9, can walk away and start a free-to-air series that doesn't owe billions in debt, with a governing body of their choosing. F1 could fade away, and without F1 what is FIA? Their junior series would collapse without a destination. Ferrari would take an incalculable hit on promotion and brand.

So the 7 will be declining to sign for 2021, for the time being.

Do you know how many teams arrived in F1, did some racings or stayed some years, and then disappeared while Ferrari has been there since the begining of F1?
People can not agree with Ferrari, or even hate them like someone can feel it when reading the passionate debate here, but they have always been there either they win or lost. There are people who know that and they think about it carefully before acting.
This kind of pressure on the FIA in order to understand what Ferrari innovation was and if they will use it in 2020 will not work...

[Vasconia]

To be honest, the FIA mostly. Should Ferrari have done something dodgy, it's best for them to shut up right now. The FIA on the other hand handled it like utter morons.

They should have published the last statement initially and the controversy would have been way smaller.

I'm sure Ferrari co wrote the first statement. The entire point was to not declare guilt, it sort of back fired. When even some genuine Ferrari fans are now admitting the obviousness of guilt. It's a bad way to begin a season for all parties involved.

I won´t never understand why having involved so many intelligent people, someone could think that this initial statement was a good idea, really.

All the teams try to push the boundaries and sometimes they go too far, if this happens and its proved(what it seems it wasn´t the case) they should be finned, and that´s all. I don´t get all this drama and some comments about how the fans should/could react in Australia. Mclaren´s case in 2007 was way worse and I cant recall fans protesting against the team during races.

[Chene_Mostert]

No, that's where you are very wrong, they only need to prove that they comply with the control measures put in place as per the regulation.

That's exactly what I said. If Ferrari were innocent, they could have easily proved they complied with the regulations. The "pie eating" analogy was poor because unlike that example, Ferrari could have used concrete data and examples to prove they complied with the regulations. But They couldn't, hence the settlement.

Well obviously they proved that they complied, otherwise the would have been found in breech of a stipulated regulation.

[Schumix]

More like 70% of the teams playing a theatre... I want to see their so called "integrity" once they found what's Ferrari doing... If Ferrari would say OK here is the thing we are doing that and that and is legal within the rules (not in the spirit but legal) they would just copy it ASAP... (double diffuser, blown diffuser, cold blowing, flexible wings, f-duct, oil burning, ...)

IF it was legal then of course they'd all do it. I thought it was pretty obvious that Ferrari stopped doing it though, last year, because FIA started looking into it and issuing TD's.

I don't know, I still read here that it wasn't the case from the data. Ferrari may only tuned it down. We need to wait for the first few races.

From all the fuss what Mercedes is doing about it I have a feeling that they can see from the testing that Ferrari doesn't lost it's advantage.

You are fully right: we just have to wait the begining of 2020 F1 season and we will see what is going on with Ferrari PU performance.
We now understand why Mercedes was so carefully watching / scrutining Ferrari PU during pre-season testing.

Someone who loves F1 loves to see fights on track. And may be we will have real fights on track this year...