FIA-Ferrari PU Statement Controversy

[Chene_Mostert]

Article 2.7 says that the team must demonstrate to the stewards that the car complies at each event.

That means the team has to prove it is legal. The stewards don't have to show it is illegal. Different burden of proof and it means the team can't just say "it's legal but we won't show you why" as they did with the FIA investigation.

That's easy then.
They take the regulations and they start with point one and they tick of each item as it appears in the regulation.
I'm sure that is exactly what the FIA did.
If they do anything that is not covered. in the regulation, then its still proven to be legal in terms of the regulation.

They would have to prove that each bit was legal. Just saying "it's legal, honest guv" isn't proving anything.

Yes, I agree I'm sure it gets done at all races.
Don't the stewards check FF meters at all events for integrity?
Are they not calibrated, Maintained and sealed by a third party?
Do the stewards not monitor FF on a continual basis?
Do the teams not use standard ECU's of witch the source code must be supplied to the stewards ate every race?
So I don't foresee any issues.

[henry]

Question:
How would the current rules deal with a Bennetton traction control software type of situation? Say a hypothetical situation where a device could allow illegal operation but it can't be proven that said device was "active" during running even though it is physically embedded in the hardware ?

It's not necessary to show the device was in use during competition. The technical non-compliance lies in having the device fitted, or in this case installing software capable of breaching the regulation. Although if the entrant was able to demonstrate satisfactorily that the device was never used, it may mitigate the judgement

Not really.. u are wrong. If something can operate illegally, the judge have to prove it was illegally operated

what you say only applies to what is regulated with dimensional measurements for example.

I agree. There are, I think, two distinct circumstances in which this applies.

One Is during a race weekend. The illegal operation has to be pointed out before the results are made official. Once they are officially published nothing about the results can change. The competitor could stand up as soon as they are published and say, “fooled you, I cheated”, and there would be no consequence for the race. The issue then becomes one of sporting probity. Did they use their best endeavours to race within the rules, and if not did they bring the sport into disrepute?

In the scenario @Mudflap suggests if the competitor says, it’s not a bypass valve it’s an emergency pressure relief device, unless there is a record of it being operated the regulating authorities would need to accept their explanation. If the operation isn’t monitored however, the authorities might think that increases suspicion. The competitor might think that the circumstances look bad but not incontrovertible and so agree to a no fault settlement.

The authority’s might be that it wouldn’t be completely satisfactory but it allows the sport to continue without further complications. We shall see how that pans out.

One further thought, the authorities might insist that if the device in question stays on the car then it must be monitored. This would likely be the case for any device or process that is called in to question.

[izzy]

I think this is, in some way, about the position of Ferrari in the forthcoming Concord Agreement (for want of a better term). I think the teams want to end Ferrari's special treatment in the Agreement. No veto, no "special money" etc.

It's about putting down a line that says "here is the governing body, and here are the teams and no-one sits on both sides of the line".

Yes so true, i mean they have actually fixed the Ferrari fuel issue, and now it's about the governance really and a new era with fairness, with this as an example

[Jolle]

Don’t forget what is at play here. In not for coverups or anything, but if Ferrari broke the rules worthy of a years exclusion, F1 would loose some very big partners: Ferrari and Philip Morris,

In my logic the infringement would have been so serious that it couldn’t been dealt with with a big fine and a exclusion from the WCC from 2019, like they did with McLaren/Mercedes in 2008.

[dans79]

Or option 3 the Engineers at other teams aren't dumb, and given enough time they figured out what Ferrari was doing.

If they have figured it out,

a) Why don't they do the same with their own PU, since it cannot be traced.

b) Why are they waiting for FIA and not protesting whatever Ferrari is doing?

Understanding what they're doing is one thing technically implementing it is another.

I would assume they were hoping the FIA would do their job, not to mention they can't actually protest until a race has been run.

[Just_a_fan]

Don’t forget what is at play here. In not for coverups or anything, but if Ferrari broke the rules worthy of a years exclusion, F1 would loose some very big partners: Ferrari and Philip Morris,

In my logic the infringement would have been so serious that it couldn’t been dealt with with a big fine and a exclusion from the WCC from 2019, like they did with McLaren/Mercedes in 2008.

Of course it could. 2019 is gone so retroactively removing Ferrari's points makes no difference to Philip Morris (who shouldn't be involved with F1 anyway).

If Ferrari are "too big to fail" then the sport is broken to its core. No team should get preferential treatment because they're "more important" than others. Ferrari aren't bigger than F1.

[turbof1]

Don’t forget what is at play here. In not for coverups or anything, but if Ferrari broke the rules worthy of a years exclusion, F1 would loose some very big partners: Ferrari and Philip Morris,

In my logic the infringement would have been so serious that it couldn’t been dealt with with a big fine and a exclusion from the WCC from 2019, like they did with McLaren/Mercedes in 2008.

Of course it could. 2019 is gone so retroactively removing Ferrari's points makes no difference to Philip Morris (who shouldn't be involved with F1 anyway).

If Ferrari are "too big to fail" then the sport is broken to its core. No team should get preferential treatment because they're "more important" than others. Ferrari aren't bigger than F1.

They said that about banks in 2008 too. They saved them anyhow else the financial crisis would have been bigger by a magnitude. Sometimes justice wins, sometimes the common good wins.

The situation is getting quite polar now. Depending on how serious the 7 teams are about this, it can end up with either Ferrari teams in F1, or with no Ferrari teams in it. Either scenario is a dead blow to F1.

As far as I personally go, an independent and thorough investigation has to be done, because we don't know what Ferrari did wrong, or indeed if they did anything wrong. Something based on honesty and transparency is the only thing to solve the current situation in a durable, clean way. But an investigation has to be done, either to solve Ferrari of guilt and clean their reputation, or to determine guilt and apply correct compensation.

[bluechris]

If this goes on and the 7 teams gain something then only FIA has to say what is wrong with the Ferrari PU and no one else can force Ferrari to prove anything, except v again if the others say it and face espionage that will be worse for them. This means that FIA must say to Ferrari that they did this or that with proof, but so far from what we have seen FIA is clueless of what Ferrari is doing if is doing something in the 1st place.
All the rest discussions are irrelevant really and all the moaning is happening for the next year Concord agreement, Ferrari veto power and the extra money that they get. The last one about the money is a double sword because in the 7 there is also McLaren that also receives extra money for their history in the sport so i expect they will step back in the end.
Its a soap opera really but has its fun for me reading all the hate and rumors here and everywhere on the internet. The greatest part is opinions from respectable journalists with no base with the only reason to throw gasoline in the fire and please the English audience that mainly are Mercedes favorite because of Hamilton.

[TAG]

They said that about banks in 2008 too. They saved them anyhow else the financial crisis would have been bigger by a magnitude. Sometimes justice wins, sometimes the common good wins.

Funny enough the people that saved the banks by giving them our tax dollars are the same ones decrying socialism for wanting to give tax dollars to the people. When common interests converge, there's no need for formal conspiracy theories.

The FiA and Ferrari have a long list of common interests. Maybe we can socialize Ferrari's 2020 special payment from the bottom up?

[turbof1]

Its a soap opera really but has its fun for me reading all the hate and rumors here and everywhere on the internet. The greatest part is opinions from respectable journalists with no base with the only reason to throw gasoline in the fire and please the English audience that mainly are Mercedes favorite because of Hamilton.

Rediculous statement.

I've seen the most neutral and rational people getting upset with what is happening. Labeling everyone who puts doubts and questions at not necessarily so at Ferrari, but at the FIA for handling this in very terrible and abnormal way, as people who love Mercedes and Hamilton, is belittling to say the least.

I fully encourage people to discuss if they disagree. I fully encourage people, on both sides of the matter. to bring forward constructive argument. What I don't encourage and don't accept, is people belittling the other side and trying to force the discussion down a cess pit. That is condescending. Just because people do not agree, does not make them by default haters or gossips.

They said that about banks in 2008 too. They saved them anyhow else the financial crisis would have been bigger by a magnitude. Sometimes justice wins, sometimes the common good wins.

Funny enough the people that saved the banks by giving them our tax dollars are the same ones decrying socialism for wanting to give tax dollars to the people. When common interests converge, there's no need for formal conspiracy theories.

The FiA and Ferrari have a long list of common interests. Maybe we can socialize Ferrari's 2020 special payment from the bottom up?

There is always irony and hypocricy involved in these matters, I agree. I'm just trying to look it from both perspectives, trying to find the pain point.

[TAG]

Its a soap opera really but has its fun for me reading all the hate and rumors here and everywhere on the internet. The greatest part is opinions from respectable journalists with no base with the only reason to throw gasoline in the fire and please the English audience that mainly are Mercedes favorite because of Hamilton.

Rediculous statement.

I've seen the most neutral and rational people getting upset with what is happening. Labeling everyone who puts doubts and questions at not necessarily so at Ferrari, but at the FIA for handling this in very terrible and abnormal way, as people who love Mercedes and Hamilton, is belittling to say the least.

I fully encourage people to discuss if they disagree. I fully encourage people, on both sides of the matter. to bring forward constructive argument. What I don't encourage and don't accept, is people belittling the other side and trying to force the discussion down a cess pit. That is condescending. Just because people do not agree, does not make them by default haters or gossips.

They said that about banks in 2008 too. They saved them anyhow else the financial crisis would have been bigger by a magnitude. Sometimes justice wins, sometimes the common good wins.

Funny enough the people that saved the banks by giving them our tax dollars are the same ones decrying socialism for wanting to give tax dollars to the people. When common interests converge, there's no need for formal conspiracy theories.

The FiA and Ferrari have a long list of common interests. Maybe we can socialize Ferrari's 2020 special payment from the bottom up?

There is always irony and hypocricy involved in these matters, I agree. I'm just trying to look it from both perspectives, trying to find the pain point.

12 years of not winning anything is pain enough, this being the narrative of the season is going to suck and Liberty Media is going to step in on this, in front or behind the scenes. It's their investment, they'll not sit by.

[GPR-A]

I fully encourage people, on both sides of the matter. to bring forward constructive argument.

12 years of not winning anything is pain enough, this being the narrative of the season is going to suck and Liberty Media is going to step in on this, in front or behind the scenes.

There you go, constructive argument.

[turbof1]

12 years of not winning anything is pain enough, this being the narrative of the season is going to suck and Liberty Media is going to step in on this, in front or behind the scenes. It's their investment, they'll not sit by.

I am refraining from outright accusing Ferrari at this moment in time . I don't think it is correct now to blame on it some sort of "win at all costs" mentality. There needs to be more information first to determine anything around those lines, so please do stay reasonable. Again, my opinion just sits on shuffeling down to the truth. If we are talking about cheating in F1 in general, well competition does lead to those extremes and the act is not surprising. General process in dealing with that is suspicion, determining if the suspicion is correct and from there either apply correct and fair punishment or exconerate from blame. Those are simple black and white outcomes a competitive sport really needs. The FIA was unable to bring that. I would have been more accepting to this if their second statement was their first statement; there's no shame in admitting being unable to do a task and going for a settlement as the next best thing (provided said settlement is also fair the 3th parties). Trying to convelute it, that was the error they made.

[turbof1]

I fully encourage people, on both sides of the matter. to bring forward constructive argument.

12 years of not winning anything is pain enough, this being the narrative of the season is going to suck and Liberty Media is going to step in on this, in front or behind the scenes.

There you go, constructive argument.

It's not like Stewards would call Andy Cowell and say, hey come let's go and check Ferrari PU. Viola' Ferrari is cheating!

To summarize....

This is what people are inhaling when they say, Ferrari was cheating. All without any proof!

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com ... SY355_.jpg

How long is this thread going to run, beyond the FIA clarification? Now that FIA deemed the matter to be closed, may be the mods should now rename this thread to "Public display of anger, frustration and ignorance towards Ferrari via a large dose of Speculation".

Very constructive indeed. You got anything else to throw your own windows in ?

If you want to be part of the solution, then act like it. Don't try to instigate. Then you are part of the problem.

[gshevlin]

A matter of this significance is not closed just because a governing body of a sport says so. To use an analogy from another sport, there were rumblings and accusations for years that Lance Armstrong was using PEDs when he won his Tour de France titles. The UCI and Armstrong kept denying impropriety, but then a few years later Armstrong was forced to publicly admit that he had used PEDs, and his titles were vacated.
People are ignorant because the FIA has not revealed any details, yet they have admitted that they had evidence. When a governing body of a sport issues a statement that is full of hints and obfuscation, and then refuses to expand on it or clarify it, that reduces their credibility, and the credibility of the competitor referred to in the statement. Absent full facts, speculation will occur. This is a logical outcome, and dismissing it tends to reveal the biases of the people doing the dismissing.