2012 Formula One Season

[tinfoilhat]

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

Deliberately crashing so as to bring about a safety car and thus hand advantage to Alonso, and deliberately breaking the seal on a gearbox to bring about a grid penalty and thus hand advantage to Alonso, seems a far from spurious parallel to make.

sorry i fail to see how having a deliberate accident on track under race conditions and potentially endangering your driver as well as the other competitors to alter a result is in any way parallel to an out of race pit strategy which improves your starting position.

i honestly believe you can argue semantics until the cows come home, but the rules did not in fact exclude ferrais course of action. the oversight is that of the FIA alone and if they choose to amend the rules such a course of action will be illegal in future. Should the rules remain as is we can only assume that such actions continue to be acceptable.

currently however the naysayers have little to stand on as it has been determined there was no wrong doing.it cant go both ways, because while there is an age old debate regarding the letter vs the spirit of the law, only one can be clearly demonstrated.

regarding your what ifs, one can only speculate, but i put it to you that Maclaren could not have conceived of the strategy on their own, for better or for worse. Having seen it in action perhaps they would be more likely to take advantage of the loophole had they a dog in the hunt. Their team structure also makes it unlikely that it could happen with their current driver lineup.

[rixalex]

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

Deliberately crashing so as to bring about a safety car and thus hand advantage to Alonso, and deliberately breaking the seal on a gearbox to bring about a grid penalty and thus hand advantage to Alonso, seems a far from spurious parallel to make.

sorry i fail to see how having a deliberate accident on track under race conditions and potentially endangering your driver as well as the other competitors to alter a result is in any way parallel to an out of race pit strategy which improves your starting position.

You don't say why there are no parallels, you just way why the two incidents weren't the same, and with respect, we already knew that.

One was a twisting of the rules at the expense of one driver, for the benefit of the other, that happened during a race, the other was a twisting of the rules at the expense of one driver, for the benefit of the other, that happened before a race. Plenty of parallels there if you care to look.

[rixalex]

regarding your what ifs, one can only speculate, but i put it to you that Maclaren could not have conceived of the strategy on their own, for better or for worse. Having seen it in action perhaps they would be more likely to take advantage of the loophole had they a dog in the hunt. Their team structure also makes it unlikely that it could happen with their current driver lineup.

I wasn't making any comment about whether or not McClaren could have or would have dreamt up this rule twist, i was commenting on how i believe some people would be reacting differently had it been McClaren, and specifically had it been Hamilton, the one at the centre of this.

[tinfoilhat]

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

Deliberately crashing so as to bring about a safety car and thus hand advantage to Alonso, and deliberately breaking the seal on a gearbox to bring about a grid penalty and thus hand advantage to Alonso, seems a far from spurious parallel to make.

sorry i fail to see how having a deliberate accident on track under race conditions and potentially endangering your driver as well as the other competitors to alter a result is in any way parallel to an out of race pit strategy which improves your starting position.

You don't say why there are no parallels, you just way why the two incidents weren't the same, and with respect, we already knew that.

One was a twisting of the rules at the expense of one driver, for the benefit of the other, that happened during a race, the other was a twisting of the rules at the expense of one driver, for the benefit of the other, that happened before a race. Plenty of parallels there if you care to look.

sorry, i thought i stated quite clearly that any parallel that may exist was spurious.

i think that if you are looking to compare the similarities between this event and a deliberate accident to alter the standings you are being deliberately obtuse and disingenuous -- physically putting your car into the wall in no way resembles a creative interpretation of the engine and gearbox change rules.

but the argument is becoming circular, let us agree to disagree

Edited November 22, 2012 by tinfoilhat

[carmine]

remember well the late Jean-Marie Balestre being the catalyst for one of senna's indescretions. Senna took pole with Prost second so Balestre switched the pole position to the dirty side of the track! Not saying Senna taking out Prost was right but you have to look at the blatent cheating in the circumstances surrounding it.

[rixalex]

but the argument is becoming circular, let us agree to disagree

Agreed.

[JetsetBkk]

Ah! So the end justifies the means. That's a slippery path.

As for what Hamilton or anyone else said about his performance, it doesn't change what Ferrari did - just like the infamous "Fernando is faster than you" radioed to Massa in 2010. Why didn't they say "Slow don't and let Alonso pass!"? Answer: Because it was against the rules.

Granted, at the time it was against the regulations... and Ferrari paid the fine.

It must also be pointed out that teams issuing orders that influence the outcome of the race is no longer against the regulations after it was reviewed following the incident you mention.

totster

Yes. We all know that Ferrari put pressure on the FIA to get the rule changed and that helped to reduce whatever penalty they had to pay - I can't remember what it was - and also allowed Ferrari to say "Well, it's OK now so we aren't that bad, are we?"

[Totster]

Ah! So the end justifies the means. That's a slippery path.

As for what Hamilton or anyone else said about his performance, it doesn't change what Ferrari did - just like the infamous "Fernando is faster than you" radioed to Massa in 2010. Why didn't they say "Slow don't and let Alonso pass!"? Answer: Because it was against the rules.

Granted, at the time it was against the regulations... and Ferrari paid the fine.

It must also be pointed out that teams issuing orders that influence the outcome of the race is no longer against the regulations after it was reviewed following the incident you mention.

totster

Yes. We all know that Ferrari put pressure on the FIA to get the rule changed and that helped to reduce whatever penalty they had to pay - I can't remember what it was - and also allowed Ferrari to say "Well, it's OK now so we aren't that bad, are we?"

There was no reduction in penalty, the outcome from the appeal was that the FIA was not going to take any further action.

Seems to me your quarrel is with the FIA rather than the teams, actually it seems just Ferrari, as when the other teams bend/twist the regulations it's ok ion your eyes.

totster

[JetsetBkk]

i think you have missed the point entirely.

if everyone thought like you many aspects of development in the sport would remain static: ie no f duct or double diffuser to name but two.

<snip>

Totally separate subjects. You know it, and so does everyone else.

Deliberately breaking a seal to incur a penalty and promote another driver can only be considered "unsporting" at best and "cheating" at most.

Oh, and opposite to what "b19bry" said, I actually liked Alonso over the last year or so right up until he said how he agreed with Domenicali about breaking the seal.

After that, I go back to my original opinion: that they - and apparently several posters here - have no concept of "sportsmanship". Win at any costs is their motto.

I will not change my opinion and neither will you. We are from different generations.

[Totster]

i think you have missed the point entirely.

if everyone thought like you many aspects of development in the sport would remain static: ie no f duct or double diffuser to name but two.

<snip>

Totally separate subjects. You know it, and so does everyone else.

Deliberately breaking a seal to incur a penalty and promote another driver can only be considered "unsporting" at best and "cheating" at most.

Oh, and opposite to what "b19bry" said, I actually liked Alonso over the last year or so right up until he said how he agreed with Domenicali about breaking the seal.

After that, I go back to my original opinion: that they - and apparently several posters here - have no concept of "sportsmanship". Win at any costs is their motto.

I will not change my opinion and neither will you. We are from different generations.

I'm sorry, if it were as simple as teams and competitors employing good 'sportsmanship' then there would be no need for rules and regulations as everyone would be good boys and girls and be falling over each other trying to let the other person win.. "you go first", "well that's jolly decent old chap, but please you go first", "no I couldn't possibly go before you", "well lets start together and promise not to overtake each other", "well that's damn sporting of you"... etc

totster

[Totster]

Oh, and the different generation thing, team orders were part of F1 before I was even born..

totster

[JetsetBkk]

Ah! So the end justifies the means. That's a slippery path.

As for what Hamilton or anyone else said about his performance, it doesn't change what Ferrari did - just like the infamous "Fernando is faster than you" radioed to Massa in 2010. Why didn't they say "Slow don't and let Alonso pass!"? Answer: Because it was against the rules.

Granted, at the time it was against the regulations... and Ferrari paid the fine.

It must also be pointed out that teams issuing orders that influence the outcome of the race is no longer against the regulations after it was reviewed following the incident you mention.

totster

Yes. We all know that Ferrari put pressure on the FIA to get the rule changed and that helped to reduce whatever penalty they had to pay - I can't remember what it was - and also allowed Ferrari to say "Well, it's OK now so we aren't that bad, are we?"

There was no reduction in penalty, the outcome from the appeal was that the FIA was not going to take any further action.

Seems to me your quarrel is with the FIA rather than the teams, actually it seems just Ferrari, as when the other teams bend/twist the regulations it's ok ion your eyes.

totster

You only have to see the amount of press about this to know that it is usually Ferrari who are up to the dirty tricks. I don't know how you can deny it.

I have no quarrel with anyone, just pointing out that in my opinion - and many other peoples' - Ferrari cheated. Listen to what the commentators said.

The fact that the ex-CEO of Ferrari is now the president of the FIA has no bearing on how much cheating Ferrari get away with, does it.

[JetsetBkk]

Oh, and the different generation thing, team orders were part of F1 before I was even born..

totster

It's a different attitude - but then, you knew that didn't you.

[Totster]

i think you have missed the point entirely.

if everyone thought like you many aspects of development in the sport would remain static: ie no f duct or double diffuser to name but two.

<snip>

Totally separate subjects. You know it, and so does everyone else.

Not at all ! It's all about teams manipulating the regulations to get an advantage.

totster

[Guest]

I'm sorry, if it were as simple as teams and competitors employing good 'sportsmanship' then there would be no need for rules and regulations as everyone would be good boys and girls and be falling over each other trying to let the other person win.. "you go first", "well that's jolly decent old chap, but please you go first", "no I couldn't possibly go before you", "well lets start together and promise not to overtake each other", "well that's dam_n sporting of you"... etc

totster

While I don't agree with you how the game should be played.. that was hilarious

[Totster]

You only have to see the amount of press about this to know that it is usually Ferrari who are up to the dirty tricks. I don't know how you can deny it.

I have no quarrel with anyone, just pointing out that in my opinion - and many other peoples' - Ferrari cheated. Listen to what the commentators said.

The fact that the ex-CEO of Ferrari is now the president of the FIA has no bearing on how much cheating Ferrari get away with, does it.

To have cheated they must have broken the rules.. which they haven't. That's the rules fault, not Ferraris.

totster

[rixalex]

To have cheated they must have broken the rules.. which they haven't. That's the rules fault, not Ferraris.

totster

Yes technically Totster you are right.

It's just that whilst i understand Ferrari themselves taking this sort of line of defence for their actions, i don't really understand people not connected to the team doing so also. You have already stated that you didn't agree/like what they did, right? Defending them and blaming the rules and the FIA for what they did, would to me be the same as blaming the the rules and the FIA for what Schumacher did in driving into Hill and Villeneuve. Don't recall many people doing that then or now. Most people (besides Schumacher and his fans) think that whilst it is true that he did get away with it, he shouldn't have been able to and frankly speaking he was a bit of &lt;deleted&gt; for doing what he did. And no, i'm not saying what Schumacher did was the same as what Ferrari did. I'm just making a point about how sometimes teams or drivers do things which technically going by the rules might not be cheating, but might still be wrong.

[Totster]

To have cheated they must have broken the rules.. which they haven't. That's the rules fault, not Ferraris.

totster

Yes technically Totster you are right.

It's just that whilst i understand Ferrari themselves taking this sort of line of defence for their actions, i don't really understand people not connected to the team doing so also. You have already stated that you didn't agree/like what they did, right? Defending them and blaming the rules and the FIA for what they did, would to me be the same as blaming the the rules and the FIA for what Schumacher did in driving into Hill and Villeneuve. Don't recall many people doing that then or now. Most people (besides Schumacher and his fans) think that whilst it is true that he did get away with it, he shouldn't have been able to and frankly speaking he was a bit of &lt;deleted&gt; for doing what he did. And no, i'm not saying what Schumacher did was the same as what Ferrari did. I'm just making a point about how sometimes teams or drivers do things which technically going by the rules might not be cheating, but might still be wrong.

Yes, what you say is true.

Look, I'm not defending Ferrari, what I am saying is that they 'played' within the rules and as such it's fair and I don't really see how anyone can complain about it. Ferrari spotted a loophole and took advantage. Any other team were free to look for it and play the card if needed, and there is a direct comparison to the Vettels car being optimised during parc ferme, therefore manipulating the regulations to their advantage (after being penalised).

You either have rules and regulations and people are free to work within them, or you don't have them and people just do what they want. In the case where you have regulations then you accept what happens, everyone is working within the same code.

You can't suddenly turn around and say to a team they can't do something because they weren't expected to do it under the current regulations, it's the regulators job to anticipate all eventualities.

There is nothing unsporting or cheating about doing something within the regulations set out that all teams are following.

I think the Schumacher thing is a totally different kettle of fish, he seemingly got away with some very suspect driving.. however one would hope that he came under the same scrutiny as any other driver would.. I have to end though by saying that for me Schumacher represented the un-sportsman like side of F1 when in his hey day

totster

[rixalex]

There is nothing unsporting or cheating about doing something within the regulations set out that all teams are following.

I think the Schumacher thing is a totally different kettle of fish, he seemingly got away with some very suspect driving.. however one would hope that he came under the same scrutiny as any other driver would.. I have to end though by saying that for me Schumacher represented the un-sportsman like side of F1 when in his hey day

totster

You define unsporting or cheating behaviour as being something quite black and white. If it is in violation of the regulations, it can be considered as unsporting or cheating, but if it isn't, it can't.

But then you go on to say you considered Schumi unsportsmanly, even though you accept that what he did to Hill apparently didn't break any rules at the time and he certainly wasn't punished if he did. So by your own definition, he wasn't unsporting and nor did he cheat. He simply worked the regulations to his benefit.

[Totster]

There is nothing unsporting or cheating about doing something within the regulations set out that all teams are following.

I think the Schumacher thing is a totally different kettle of fish, he seemingly got away with some very suspect driving.. however one would hope that he came under the same scrutiny as any other driver would.. I have to end though by saying that for me Schumacher represented the un-sportsman like side of F1 when in his hey day

totster

You define unsporting or cheating behaviour as being something quite black and white. If it is in violation of the regulations, it can be considered as unsporting or cheating, but if it isn't, it can't.

But then you go on to say you considered Schumi unsportsmanly, even though you accept that what he did to Hill apparently didn't break any rules at the time and he certainly wasn't punished if he did. So by your own definition, he wasn't unsporting and nor did he cheat. He simply worked the regulations to his benefit.

Hmm, yes I can see how what I said came across.

Maybe I dedifferentiate between drivers behaviour when racing in a dangerous situation to that of team orders and decisions off track.

I watched the Setanta coverage last weekend with David Coulthard commentating, he remarked on a few occasions of the professionalism and fellow respect of the drivers in relation to leaving enough room and having the confidence to drive wheel to wheel. He was spot on (he had some choice words when it came to Grosjean though). My choice of words probably wasn't correct. I think a better description of Schumacher's driving back then was unrespectful and at some times unprofessional. I want to make sure you realise that I believe there is a fundamental difference between his conduct back then and Ferraris conduct in the recent GP

totster

[rixalex]

I want to make sure you realise that I believe there is a fundamental difference between his conduct back then and Ferraris conduct in the recent GP

Yes i agree there is a big difference between what he did and what he got away with, and what Ferrari did and what they got away with.

Regardless, I still think however that they did cross over some sort of line, and pushed things a little too far. Not by much, but enough to make me think that in an ideal world, that sort of manipulation of the rules should not be allowed.

I don't think it is as cut and dried a matter as, if you haven't broken a rule, you haven't acted in an unsportsmanly fashion.

[Totster]

I want to make sure you realise that I believe there is a fundamental difference between his conduct back then and Ferraris conduct in the recent GP

<snip> that in an ideal world, that sort of manipulation of the rules should not be allowed.

I don't think it is as cut and dried a matter as, if you haven't broken a rule, you haven't acted in an unsportsmanly fashion.

Well that may be so, but that's not for us to decide. That is the regulators job. And as long as the regulations stay as they are, any team is free to employ that tactic.

totster

[b19bry]

There is nothing unsporting or cheating about doing something within the regulations set out that all teams are following.

I think the Schumacher thing is a totally different kettle of fish, he seemingly got away with some very suspect driving.. however one would hope that he came under the same scrutiny as any other driver would.. I have to end though by saying that for me Schumacher represented the un-sportsman like side of F1 when in his hey day

totster

You define unsporting or cheating behaviour as being something quite black and white. If it is in violation of the regulations, it can be considered as unsporting or cheating, but if it isn't, it can't.

But then you go on to say you considered Schumi unsportsmanly, even though you accept that what he did to Hill apparently didn't break any rules at the time and he certainly wasn't punished if he did. So by your own definition, he wasn't unsporting and nor did he cheat. He simply worked the regulations to his benefit.

Hmm, yes I can see how what I said came across.

Maybe I dedifferentiate between drivers behaviour when racing in a dangerous situation to that of team orders and decisions off track.

I watched the Setanta coverage last weekend with David Coulthard commentating, he remarked on a few occasions of the professionalism and fellow respect of the drivers in relation to leaving enough room and having the confidence to drive wheel to wheel. He was spot on (he had some choice words when it came to Grosjean though). My choice of words probably wasn't correct. I think a better description of Schumacher's driving back then was unrespectful and at some times unprofessional. I want to make sure you realise that I believe there is a fundamental difference between his conduct back then and Ferraris conduct in the recent GP

totster

I agree, to compare how drivers handle themselves on track to how the teams, designers, managers look to exploit the rule book are two entirely different matters. Of the current drivers I would class Alonso, Button, Raikkonen and Webber all as 'fair' drivers that don't employ 'dirty' tactics. You might accuse Alonso of exploiting team orders and the rulebook but he is not a 'dirty' driver. One could drive wheel to wheel with him in confidence and respect where say Schumacher would have no calms about punting you off.

I really question whether Grosjean and Maldonado deserve a place on the F1 grid.

[ignis]

If everyone can break there gearbox seal to move there team mate up, would there be any point in watching Qualifying ?

or even broadcasting it, as on race day would be a completely diffident line up ?

So think the answer is very clear.

[rixalex]

I want to make sure you realise that I believe there is a fundamental difference between his conduct back then and Ferraris conduct in the recent GP

<snip> that in an ideal world, that sort of manipulation of the rules should not be allowed.

I don't think it is as cut and dried a matter as, if you haven't broken a rule, you haven't acted in an unsportsmanly fashion.

Well that may be so, but that's not for us to decide. That is the regulators job. And as long as the regulations stay as they are, any team is free to employ that tactic.

totster

Yes of course any team is free to do whatever they like if they can get away with it, but as i say, getting away with it doesn't mean therefore that it is by definition sportsmanly. What is sportsmanly and what isn't is something we are all free to have an opinion on and make up our own minds about. For me, what Ferrari did wasn't very sportsmanly, not only because of the way it in my opinion twisted a rule, but because of the position it put Massa in. Helping your team mate out is one thing; being made to bend over and take one from behind is another. Quite how Massa manages to walk with his head in the air these days i don't know. Must be truly demoralising and humiliating to be in his position. Not that i have much sympathy for him. His driving this season has been in general so uninspiring. He gets paid a lot of money to do what he does, and it's a shame such a sought after and prestigious seat isn't given to someone who really wants it and someone who has something to prove. Still, not like that is going to happen any time soon.

One more point regarding regulators and how they deem things. I think there are certain practices that if given the choice, they would prefer were not a part of the sport. Team orders is one of those practices that i don't think they are comfortable with. They tried unsuccessfully to legislate against it, because i think in an ideal world, what they would like is for the teams to all take the same sort of approach that McClaren usually does, in giving both drivers pretty equal support and encouraging both drivers to fight for the title, up until the point where a driver mathematically can not win. This is not only the fair approach for the drivers, it is the approach that in my opinion is best for the sport, because what people in general want to see is all 24 cars on the grid being driven competitively, not half of them being driven as some sort of back up to the team mate. I don't think therefore it is the case that regulators in general approve of team orders, i think it is more the case that regulators accept that policing a no team orders rule is just too difficult, as it so proved.

And in the case of deliberately breaking a gear box seal to bring about a grid penalty, i don't imagine the regulators are particularly happy or approving of this practice, but again accept that it is a loop-hole they can't think of a way to easily plug. On this occasion Ferrari went public with their little trick to move Alonso up the grid, but i believe they only went public with it because they were worried about the possibility that if they didn't and if somehow what they did was leaked, the FIA would have had a problem with it. My guess is that the FIA would have preferred to have not allowed them to do what they did, but had to accept that if they didn't, it could potentially create all sorts of future headaches for them in having to prove every time a gear box seal is broken whether it was done for genuine reasons or for tactical reasons. Had they not allowed Ferrari to do what they did, what would stop a team next time doing it in a surreptitious manner? The same situation as with team orders. It's easy to stop teams and police them against telling drivers to slow down and allow their team mate to pass, but how do you stop teams from using code for the same instruction, or stop them making agreements behind closed doors before the race? You can't stop that. Doesn't mean the FIA wouldn't like to or that the FIA approve of it or consider it particularly sportsmanly. It's an extremely complex sport and the FIA have a very difficult job, no doubt about that.

[rixalex]

If everyone can break there gearbox seal to move there team mate up, would there be any point in watching Qualifying ?

or even broadcasting it, as on race day would be a completely diffident line up ?

So think the answer is very clear.

Indeed.

Can you imagine in football a team deliberately kicking the ball in their own net for tactical reasons because they didn't want to finish top of their group. There would be an outcry and the team most likely would be banned for contriving the result. Of course in football there would be all the gambling implications too. Not sure how much gambling there is with regards F1, perhaps not much, but imagine if someone had money on Massa qualifying in the top five and he does, but then Ferrari do what they did. A legal nightmare for the bookies.

[b19bry]

You either have rules and regulations and people are free to work within them, or you don't have them and people just do what they want. In the case where you have regulations then you accept what happens, everyone is working within the same code.

You can't suddenly turn around and say to a team they can't do something because they weren't expected to do it under the current regulations, it's the regulators job to anticipate all eventualities.

There is nothing unsporting or cheating about doing something within the regulations set out that all teams are following.

totster

For all the bluster that's being posted here you've 'nailed it' with the above words

I reckon Vettel's still in the box seats for the championship........anyone here for Alonso to take it lol ?

Edited November 23, 2012 by b19bry

[rixalex]

For all the justifications, reasonings and excuses, it's telling that the only argument ever offered by anyone in defence of what Ferrari did, has been: well they didn't break any rules and they got away with it.. so it must be ok...stop complaining.

It's an interesting way of looking at things but it's not a line of argument i have heard much before and not one i expect to hear repeated again when, at some future time, a different team / different driver, pulls off something similar that also manages to fall within the rules but that is also equally unsporting. I expect then the same people who have justified this nonsense will be outspoken in their condemnation.

As far as the race this weekend goes, i'll repeat what i say every year, and that is there's always something a bit disappointing for me about finishing in Brazil. I just don't think it is one of the more exciting circuits of the year. To be honest i miss the days when we finished in Australia.

As far as who wins the WDC goes, i think there's an argument that both Alonso and Vettel deserve it. Alonso has been very consistent and almost always got the maximum possible out of the car. Vettel hasn't been so consistent, but he has had his moments and he has been particularly good in qualifying... and unlike Alonso, he hasn't had the benefit of having the team focused exclusively on him.

May the best man win... and hope it isn't decided by mechanical failure, or something silly outside of the driver's control.

[Mosha]

Perhaps the FIA should restrict the number of experts teams employ to study the regs.

[b19bry]

Inevitable I guess but sad to see Kobayashi has lost his Sauber seat and probably now out of F1