Ferrari asks for clarification of rules

Inigo Montoya · 9 Apr 2003, 14:32 (Ref:564043)

Gazzetta reported that Ferrari has asked for clarifications on the following:

(a) Why Raikonnen was allowed to change his engine after qualifying
(b) Why everyone was allowed to change their race setup after qualifying.
(c) Why they are only allowed to bring one type of wet tyre to the race.

Apparently Michael had a full wet setup for the qualifying (explains why he was slow) - and thus lost his advantage in the race when the stewards allowed everyone to switch to wet setup.

My feeling is that its too bad for Michael that he lost his advantage, but it was just too dangerous for them to be allowed to race without wet setups.

I didn't know about the Raikonnen engine change.

Point (c): This is an idiotic rule pushed by Michelin, who has a terrible full wet weather tyre.

mirwin · 9 Apr 2003, 14:35 (Ref:564047)

The engine change rule needs work. What's to stop a driver from putting the car in neutral and trying to rev it to 20000rpm on the cool down lap. The engine would blow and you can get a new one before the race with no penalty. You should lose 10 grid places.

**Peter Mallett** · 9 Apr 2003, 14:38 (Ref:564050)

I suspect its the new f'ing rule. That is if your team name starts with "F" then you don't get to change anything after qualifying.

BootsOntheSide · 9 Apr 2003, 15:40 (Ref:564088)

Sounds like, by putting a full wet setup on, Ferrari tried a gamble without checking the rules properly, and not understnading that they would always lose out through it.

As for the rule Peter suggests is in operation, I hope Fernandez and Fitipaldi-Dingman aren't thinking of entering F1.

av8rirl · 9 Apr 2003, 15:46 (Ref:564091)

I nearly fell on my ass when I read how Ferrari are being victimised. How can the other teams get away with it? Ferrari would never bend or break a rule. We all know that!!!

I did think that Kimi should start from the back if he had work done to his car. Same as Minardi in AUS. That rule should be enforced.

Hungary 89 · 9 Apr 2003, 16:31 (Ref:564127)

Quote:

Originally posted by Peter Mallett
I suspect its the new f'ing rule. That is if your team name starts with "F" then you don't get to change anything after qualifying.

Is that in a change to the Rule implemented in 1999 that says if your team name starts with 'F' you can make your barge boards 7mm larger than anyone else?

What goes around comes around

Hungary 89 · 9 Apr 2003, 16:37 (Ref:564136)

I've never liked Ferrari's "rules clarifications" since they got Mclarens extra break pedal ruled illegal never understood that it was driver controlled!

Inigo Montoya · 9 Apr 2003, 16:43 (Ref:564142)

I don't think they are lodging any formal complaints. They just want to know how the rules will be interpreted- fair enough in my view. The one that really bothers me is the only one wet race tyre rule. That's just plain stupid.

kdr · 9 Apr 2003, 16:49 (Ref:564146)

did i read that ferrari asked for a clarification of the 75% of the race rule as well?

if as beens written, lap 53 falls short of the 75%, and kimi wasn awarded the win counting back to lap 53...does that mean that only half points should have been awarded to the finishers?

if this was pushed i suspect mclaren would prefer to take the eight points for finishing 2nd to fisi...than 5 points for winning.

glad to see everythings as clear as normal

**Adam43** · 9 Apr 2003, 17:05 (Ref:564160)

Quote:

Originally posted by kdr
if as beens written, lap 53 falls short of the 75%, and kimi wasn awarded the win counting back to lap 53...does that mean that only half points should have been awarded to the finishers?

Even if the race result is declared on lap 53, the race was stopped after 75% (lap 55, 56 or whatever), so it had completed over 75%.

Hungary 89 · 9 Apr 2003, 17:16 (Ref:564173)

Quote:

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya
I don't think they are lodging any formal complaints. They just want to know how the rules will be interpreted- fair enough in my view. The one that really bothers me is the only one wet race tyre rule. That's just plain stupid.

Sorry just venting my spleen a bit

I'm a bit anti Ferrari at the moment Don't get me wrong, I think that the Ferrari name belongs in F1 it wouldn't F1 without

I just don't think the Ferrari we have now is the one we had 20 years ago I like to think that Enzo prefered to win on Merit rather than Technicalities

Don't quite follow on the wet race rule, what aspect?

**Bononi** · 9 Apr 2003, 17:49 (Ref:564210)

Quote:

Originally posted by Hungary 89
I just don't think the Ferrari we have now is the one we had 20 years ago I like to think that Enzo prefered to win on Merit rather than Technicalities

Certainly is not the same. It took them more than 20 years to win a championship again. I bet Enzo, wherever he is, is quite happy now.

chezza · 9 Apr 2003, 18:00 (Ref:564223)

As far as i know Kimi was allowed to change his engine because he had a crack in it somewhere which I think should be allowed, however I also think that he should have had to start from the pits.

**Bononi** · 9 Apr 2003, 18:23 (Ref:564251)

Anyway, definitely there's a "crack" in this rule

Inigo Montoya · 9 Apr 2003, 18:28 (Ref:564256)

Quote:

Originally posted by Hungary 89
Sorry just venting my spleen a bit

I'm a bit anti Ferrari at the moment Don't get me wrong, I think that the Ferrari name belongs in F1 it wouldn't F1 without

I just don't think the Ferrari we have now is the one we had 20 years ago I like to think that Enzo prefered to win on Merit rather than Technicalities

Don't quite follow on the wet race rule, what aspect?

No offense taken! Like Bon said, it took 20 plus years for them to win again...

About the wet tyre rule. They are allowed only to use one type of wet tyre (either intermed. or full wets) on the weekend (unlike last year, where they could switch between full wets and intermediates). Bridgestone has always been against this rule, and Michelin strongly in favour it. Why? Because given the choice between full wets and intermediates, the teams will always choose the intermediates in case the track dries out. Some are suggesting this rule is a clever ploy on the part of Michelin to avoid having to manufacture a good full wet tyre. Just think of how pathetic their full wets were last year!

I think the teams should be allowed to switch between full wets and intermediates - for safety reasons above all!

avsfan733 · 9 Apr 2003, 18:32 (Ref:564262)

These rules are absurd, they leave to many unanswered questions, there seems to be the need for a special dispensation every race and that to me says that something is wrong with either the rule or the enforcement

paulzinho · 9 Apr 2003, 19:14 (Ref:564353)

Raikkonens engine change should have meant that he started from the pitlane IMO. Otherwise qualifying engines might see a return.

And I read that Schumi was unhappy about Raikkonen being goven full points and said it would be interesting to see how the FIA clarified this.

kdr · 9 Apr 2003, 21:01 (Ref:564491)

didn't schuey qualify on wet settings...only to see everyone else allowed to do the same on race day.

tell me it would be dangerous to let everyone out on that track with dry settings...and i'll say "what about the

tyres!

mirwin · 9 Apr 2003, 21:47 (Ref:564540)

Quote:

didn't schuey qualify on wet settings...only to see everyone else allowed to do the same on race day.

What can be changed on the car before the race in a situation like Brazil?

Inigo Montoya · 9 Apr 2003, 21:49 (Ref:564542)

That is exactly what Ferrari is asking mirwin. They were allowed to change ride height, suspension, wings, everything...

RaceTime · 9 Apr 2003, 22:37 (Ref:564594)

Which makes a total mockery of the rules saying 'no changes' - ANY changes should be penalised - whether they are made on the grounds of safety, equipment failure or force majure.

Change a vehicles settings, go to the back of the grid - no quesitons.

bosch! · 9 Apr 2003, 22:38 (Ref:564595)

Dry ride height setting could be dangerous in the wet i would think, do you want a race where only 4 cars are running after 20 laps? Some of the rules need work, some just need to be applied properly, i also thought that kimi should have lost 10 places. The stewrads seem to have had a pretty ordinary race.

Mr michelien says that full wets dont make much difference to the speed that cars aquaplane. modern inters are nearly as good as full wets of the past anyway.

Gt_R · 10 Apr 2003, 00:08 (Ref:564661)

Kimi isn't the only one who had an engine change. But isn't it stated pre-season that if the teams make any changes to the cars, they need to have their original grid slot removed and start back 10 places or back of grid?

If what Mclaren did is allowed, then wouldn't it defeat the purpose of banning qualifying engines? Teams could still use qualifying engines, break it on their Q-cooling down lap, and change it...

As for the race set-up change, i heard that pre-season, the agreed thing is that if raceday starts off wet while quals is dry, teams are allowed 15mins before the race to make the required switch. But still, there are loopholes...

Current regulations are very controversial. I personally hope to the rules would further be defined. Re-allow teams to work on their cars after qualifyings. Let teams go for one-lap qualifyings in Qualifying trim instead of race trim - while keeping the Qualifying-engine ban.

As forMichelin , yeah...i read the new rule regarding one-wet-tyre as one of their cheeky rule..and i think it should be abolished on safety grounds.. Full wets doesn't make much difference to the speed of cars in wet weather happens only if you can make a pathetic Full-wets like Michelin.... But that said, Michelin seems to have done a good job with their dry and intermediate this year.

And so is Kimi's point safe? By the rule book, he would need to choose 8pts for 2nd (Lap 54 GF was in lead), or 5pts for first (Lap 53 is less than 75% of total race distance).. pretty clear cut.

GTV27 · 10 Apr 2003, 00:24 (Ref:564671)

Slightly off topic, but blaming the tyres for the Brazil result is wrong, given how the track dried everyone would have been on inter's after a few laps anyway even with the river crossing at turn three as the dry line elsewhere would have shredded full wets.

Ferarri are well justified to ask for clarification - the rules on what changes can and can't be made under what circumstances need to be clear. Hopefully teams and FIA should be able to agree on a reliable set of rules that every body can play by.

Wrex · 10 Apr 2003, 00:45 (Ref:564684)

*claps hands* Bravo!

I wonder, had Michael changed his engine between Qual's and the race would it really have taken 4 dyas for this thread to come up. I DONT THINK SO!

All excellent questions.

(a) Why Raikonnen was allowed to change his engine after qualifying?

I was stunned this was permitted (for Villenueve also). While I dont believe either had a benefit from it (eg: a special qual engine), a rule is a rule. I'm amazed & disappointed this was seen as OK.

(b) Why everyone was allowed to change their race setup after qualifying?

This was unfortunate for Ferrari, but that life. As someone said, once a race is declared wet, everyone can change the setup. Ferrari should know that.

(c) Why they are only allowed to bring one type of wet tyre to the race?

This really is ridiculous. However, had the tyre companies brought a full wet, this issue would'nt even have been noticed. If they are 2 only have one wet tyre, then it should be a full wet. Thats it.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A novice asks........	TuscanR	Motorsport Art & Photography	23	2 Apr 2004 21:41
Ferrari Rules	avsfan733	Formula One	69	18 Dec 2003 14:25
Two asks	Dynojet	Sportscar & GT Racing	1	8 Jan 2003 14:50
The FIA rules / ..find the rule Ferrari broke [merged]	zealot	Formula One	78	15 May 2002 16:45
A tech novice asks...	Sparky	Racing Technology	1	3 Nov 2000 02:09