FIA's decision regarding McLaren right or wrong?

[Valve Bounce]

Al, I think the MS disq was covered on another thread. basically, MS was disqualified because he ignored a black flag and not because he passed Hill on the formation lap. Ignoring a black flag in any race is a very serious offence and for that he copped the ban as well. I don't think that MS would have copped more than a ten second penalty had he come in when instructed by the marshals. From memory, I think it was the team boss, probably Briatore, who instructed him to ignore the black flag.
The McLaren case is quite different. This will be argued ad nauseum simply because some members here insist rules are rules and they should be followed blindly. Others believe that rule infringements should be considered case by case, such as the barge board case. The rear wing case was also considered on merit before DC was disqualified. DC was not disqualified simply because the rules were followed blindly by the race officials. Do we really want this to happen? and this is the crux of this argument.
I would hate to see a driver disqualified simply because one of his rear view mirrors was damaged during the race, but in my opinion, this is more serious than a piece of sticky tape falling off the black box. Carna Bombers!!!

[Gerard]

Another example of how strange some FIA decisions are is when we look at what happened to David Coulthard at the Brazilian Grand Prix earlier this year.
Let's compare Mika Hakkinen's case with that of David Coulthard's.

Brazil: FIA says Coulthard's car (front wing) did not fit within the regs.
Austria: FIA says Hakkinen's car (computer box) did not fit within the regs.

Brazil: FIA says there's no advantage gained by team or driver.
Austria: FIA says there's no advantage gained by team or driver.

Brazil: FIA's decision - disqualify both car and driver.
Austria: FIA's decision - disqualify car but not the driver

Another strange thing in the FIA's verdict about Hakkinen's case are the highlighted words in the following transcript:

'As it is the duty of the Team to ensure that their car complies with the conditions of eligibility and safety throughout practice and the race (Article 7 of the 2000 Formula 1 Sporting Regulations) the Stewards of the Meeting impose a fine of US$ 50,000 on the Team and because of the exceptional circumstances of this case only deduct the points awarded to car number 1 in the Constructors Championship.'

What are the exceptional circumstances of this case?
And why doesn't the FIA elaborate on these words?
It seems to me they have great difficulties with the rulings themselves and are judging as they see fit.

[Valve Bounce]

Gerard, I think it is an over simplification of the case to suggest the two cases are the same. The black box complied with the regulations - it is the mandatory seal that was missing. The wing did not measure. However, I do feel that Mika should not have been disq'd, but that is only my opinion. I also do not feel that Mclaren should have lost the ten points for the Manufacturer's Championship. This, to me, is an extremely frivolous case, where the loss of the sticky tape seal has been taken to an extreme. If they had a proper wire seal like we have on electricity meter boxes, then it can be inferred that the seal may have been tampered with at some stage. But the loss of a piece of sticky tape in an oily environment can easily be accidental, depending on who stuck the damn thing on the box. He may have had slightly oily fingers, or th ebox may have a slight coat of oil fumes. I have asked several times whether anyone can tell me how this piece of sticky tape may have come off, but so far, no comments in this direction.

[AL Racing]

Well said Gerard, I agree entirely.

Valve, about the Schumacher thing, I agree what you said about why he got the DQ but the point is that the FIA rulings are not consistant to the rules.Back to the black flag incident with Schuey/Hill, the same thing happened in Imola this year, DC overtaking Schumacher on the formation lap but that time there was no black flag. Both incidents were very small and inocent but the FIA shouldn't DQ and give penaulties as they see fit.

[Cameron]

If this issue is so cut and dried and the responsibility was solely the teams why was the decision delayed to after examining the box?

Surely, an immediate decision could have been announced with a caveat that the box was being examined to see if additional further action was required.

Maybe that would place the F1A in a position whereby they had to follow past conventions and this might limit their interpretation of the rules in future?

Maybe I'm being cynical again.

[Ed-f1]

I think the rules have changed since 1994 and overtaking on the formation lap is now allowed.

[serpentine]

Rules(laws) are made to bring discipline to a group or society as a whole.
Those members of the FIA who make decisions regarding the rules must consider what was the intent of the rule in the first place.
Why must there be two seals on a box instead of one? Is it because if one seal gets damaged or removed there is a backup. If so, then the decision was wrong to punish McLaren especially since FIA admitted the program had not been altered.
Who puts these seals on? Is it the constructor or is it the FIA. If the constructor, levy a fine if the program has not been altered and get better adhesive. If the FIA, and the program has not been tampered with, use some common sense in making their judgement.
If these seals are so fragile or easily removed maybe there should be an electronic lock on the box applied by the scrutineers before the race when the FIA examination is done.
I also think if the rules are so rigidly applied and McLaren was fined for the infringement then MH or any other driver for that matter should not be able to win a race in an illegal car. This makes the decision not only wrong but STUPID.
I notice some labels on cars cover up cigarette advertising when it is banned in certain countries. What will be the ruling if a label comes off during the race? Will the constructor or the driver be disqualified or fined and/or lose points? Interesting question!

[Gerard]

Welcome to 10 Tenths, serpentine.
You have some valid points there. Good thinking.

About overtaking on the formation lap, this is what the rules say:

'Overtaking during the formation lap is only permitted if a car is delayed when leaving its grid position and cars behind cannot avoid passing it without unduly delaying the remainder of the field. In this case, drivers may only overtake to re-establish the original starting order.

Any driver who is delayed leaving the grid may not overtake another moving car if he was stationary after the remainder of the cars had crossed the Line, and must start the race from the back of the grid. If more than one driver is affected, they must form up at the back of the grid in the order they left to complete the formation lap. If the Line is not situated in front of pole position, for the purposes of this Article only, it will be deemed to be a white line one metre in front of pole position.

A time penalty will be imposed on any driver who, in the opinion of the Stewards, unnecessarily overtook another car during the formation lap.'

[Liz]

The way the rules, so-called, are being interpreted in the past few years appears to be so erratic that it virtually invites people to think that there is cheating, bribery, race-fixing or championship fixing going on - otherwise the only possible conclusion is that the race officials are idiots, which is very hard for me, at least, to believe.

If the car is illegal, then the pilote should lose his points for winning in an illegal car. If the car is not illegal, nobody loses any points (as happened with Ferrari last season.) If the seal falls off a Minardi, will Marc Gene lose his points along with the car losing its points? You betchum, Red Ryder. It doesn't say here that Minardi is required to keep its points to keep the teevee audience watching. It seems very odd indeed to me that the only suspect decisions that have been made recently have involved cars fighting for the championship. Coincidence? Could be. But how much coincidence are we willing to allow for?