[Rules] The FIA - what's occurring there?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Sensible.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I'm glad we've dropped the sensibility and chosen chaos again.

Yeah, announcing rules and clarity lasted about 48 hours and then normal service was resumed so I guess that's better?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

I would think that and a fear of prosecution.

But then if they were really risk averse, then why even a potentially dangerous standing re start?

If they were truly intent on finishing under green, then why not a rolling restart through the first couple of corners and actually be risk averse?

I think the difference is a standing start is a known commodity of the regs book while not doing anything makes them liable for not trying X or Y. It's not the action that usually catches a lawyer's ire but not doing an action they think is right. By trying something within the rules the FIA can shift the blame to the drivers.

But also think you will see more reds as equipment is needed on the course, or desired as was the Albon red it seems. I get track cleaning at times but that seemed a bit excessive for gravel, although I seem to recall LM or another track had vicious sharp gravel so clearing might be best with the current tires. I guess I'm not as critical as US racing is a bit more used to driving around a slow roller, well unless you're JPM and you want to create a show.

[Rusty Nail]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

If a race is red flagged, laps shouldn't be counted until the green flag is deployed.

Then you'd have to allow for some limited refueling. Teams calculate their fuel load on the number of laps and also often underfuel to account for savings under potential safety car periods.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

I think the difference is a standing start is a known commodity of the regs book while not doing anything makes them liable for not trying X or Y. It's not the action that usually catches a lawyer's ire but not doing an action they think is right. By trying something within the rules the FIA can shift the blame to the drivers.

But also think you will see more reds as equipment is needed on the course, or desired as was the Albon red it seems. I get track cleaning at times but that seemed a bit excessive for gravel, although I seem to recall LM or another track had vicious sharp gravel so clearing might be best with the current tires. I guess I'm not as critical as US racing is a bit more used to driving around a slow roller, well unless you're JPM and you want to create a show.

The interesting thing is that less than 12 hours after the GP finished Indycar had a 375m mile race on an oval averaging 210-220mph laps and several cautions and safety cars but no red flags and although the second last lap had Grojean hit the wall the last lap (23 seconds at qualifying speed) was under a FCY and the race was satisfactorily concluded.

Indycar crews are well trained and equipped and most issues, whether on ovals, road, or street courses are quickly and efficiently dealt with.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by Rusty Nail

Then you'd have to allow for some limited refueling. Teams calculate their fuel load on the number of laps and also often underfuel to account for savings under potential safety car periods.

Teams can change tyres already during red flags, so adding a little extra fuel should be no problem.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I know the rules can't really work with this, but there's a massive difference between a standard start with 48 laps to go, and a standing start with 2 laps to go.

Agree. I'd always do rolling restarts, but a 5-lap rule should be ok too.

[chillibowl]

already on to the next controversy on the horizon.

how much did Bernie and Max know about crashgate, when did they know it and while there is little to no chance of it happening, should Massa be granted the 2008 title?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/h...-act/10453434/

personally i really like Massa and still feel bad for how he thought he had won it and then to see his dad realize that his son didnt win it...that was some very emotional stuff and even after all these years i very much understand where Massa is coming from. perhaps even to the point where i support his efforts in bringing this all back up again.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

already on to the next controversy on the horizon.

how much did Bernie and Max know about crashgate, when did they know it and while there is little to no chance of it happening, should Massa be granted the 2008 title?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/h...-act/10453434/

personally i really like Massa and still feel bad for how he thought he had won it and then to see his dad realize that his son didnt win it...that was some very emotional stuff and even after all these years i very much understand where Massa is coming from. perhaps even to the point where i support his efforts in bringing this all back up again.

I saw that yesterday and was thinking of posting something. So thanks for posting it as I think it's a worthy topic.

I don't know what Massa's end game here is. I wonder if it comes down to something with this quote in the article...

We wanted to protect the sport and save it from a huge scandal. That's why I used angelic tongues to persuade my former driver Nelson Piquet to keep calm for the time being.

Bold is mine. But I wonder if Massa is like... "Oh, so my WDC was to be sacrificed to keep you and your series looking good?" Maybe he wants to drag BE through the mud on this one. And if what BE is saying is accurate then more power to Massa. I think it also should create some pain to prevent this type of cover up from happening again. I don't see them giving him the WDC. I also kind of doubt that is what Massa is shooting for.

I will always have a soft spot for Massa given that loss. He will always be a WDC winner in my heart.

Richard

[Jack65]

Sounds like Massa has too much time or money or both on his hands. It was 15 yeas ago, build a bridge and get over it.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Jack65

Sounds like Massa has too much time or money or both on his hands. It was 15 yeas ago, build a bridge and get over it.

Absolutely.
I wonder if the fact Alonso is still racing for a championship rankles with him and he is a bit sore that his career ended and Alonso is racing for his third?

[Adam43]

Fernando is faster than him.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Fernando is faster than him.

That one I will pay. First class response, Sir.

Indeed, close to one of those coffee / nose / keyboard moments.

[Skam85]

It's not a case of building a bridge and getting over it, or some sort of weird grudge against a former teammate. Without sound dramatic, it's about justice.

Felipe, who has always probably felt a little aggrieved (ACTUAL cheating remember, not vague FIA rule applications) that he was 'robbed' of a title, has read these quotes from Bernie and it would have brought up old wounds and he is looking into his legal options.

Let's not forget at the time he took it in the most sportsman way possible that has and always will applauded - and of many things we can say about Felipe I don't think anyone in F1's divided fanbase has ever classified the man as a sore loser.

[Akrapovic]

Why does Massa think crashgate cost him the title? Massa was ahead of Lewis before the incident. They both pitted together and Ferrari released Massa with the fuel hose attached, which sent him to the back as the team removed the hose. Lewis came out of the pits 8th. Massa came out last.

Given Massa was ahead of Lewis when the incident happened, and they both pitted together, and Lewis emerged 8th and Massa last, it doesn't appear the incident is what cost Massa the title. A Ferrari pit stop blunder did.

This game of "X cost me the title" seems to only include things they want to talk about. How about Massa spinning Sepang from a podium? Or his multiple spins at Silverstone? Or his engine failing in Hungary?

The championship wasn't decided on what happened in Singapore. It was decided on what happened at every race. And even if we do add more weight to Singapore, Lewis and McLaren had the exact same issue to deal during the race, and they dealt with it like professionals. Massa and Ferrari dealt with the issue like Ferrari.

[Sodemo]

Funny thing is, when I saw that spin from Piquet at the Singapore GP, I even commented on here that it looked odd, like it was a spin that no competent F1 driver would do. I guess flying into a barrier head first at 150mph wasn't in Piquet's mandate.

[Richard C]

So while I have some level of support for what Massa might be doing. It really depends upon how he does this and what he expects to get out of it.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The championship wasn't decided on what happened in Singapore. It was decided on what happened at every race.

I generally agree. I think (really hope) he might be wanting to make the larger point that there was the potential to address this at the time and that it may have not been pursued as a way to protect F1 from embarrassment and it's ability to bring itself into disrepute.

Originally Posted by Skam85

Without sound dramatic, it's about justice.

I hope that is what this is about. For example... trying to push to get the WDC title changed. I think that is a completely loosing proposition and will hurt his legacy. It is about putting the target on the right people.

If he says "Lewis won the championship, this is about preventing this from happening again" and targets whoever was complicit in the cover up, then I think it could have some legs. But who is alive at this point? Bernie? Anyone else of substance? Charlie and Max are gone. And in the end, mostly this is just an embarrassment. Can Bernie be embarrassed by this? It's just a drop in the ocean of embarrassing, inappropriate and unscrupulous actions by him. He already admitted to it and no doubt feels the cover up was the right thing to do then and now.

Richard

[Mike Harte]

I am just surprised about the timing, as this has been known about from about a year after it happened. And it is why Symonds and Briatore were banned from F1 for a period.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I am just surprised about the timing, as this has been known about from about a year after it happened. And it is why Symonds and Briatore were banned from F1 for a period.

Per the article posted on the prior page, the issue is that this was apparently known BEFORE the season closed. Until BE said recently that they knew during 2008 I think the official position was they found out details AFTER the season was closed.

That is my understanding. I could be wrong. It has been awhile and I am not an anorak on this topic.

Richard

[Alan52]

Did this story come out 1st April?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Alan52

Did this story come out 1st April?

No

[S griffin]

The FIA have had a lot on their plate lately, but part of it is their own fault, like the OZ GP. They need to sort a few things out

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

No

Then it was badly timed....

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Per the article posted on the prior page, the issue is that this was apparently known BEFORE the season closed. Until BE said recently that they knew during 2008 I think the official position was they found out details AFTER the season was closed.

That is my understanding. I could be wrong. It has been awhile and I am not an anorak on this topic.

Richard

Oh yes, Richard, there was certainly rumours floating around about it, but it wasn't until Charlie Whiting was spoken to by Piquet Snr that the real investigation started the following year.

The timing I referred to was why in 2023 has it appeared that Massa has suddenly started making waves about something that was confirmed nearly 15 years ago?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

The timing I referred to was why in 2023 has it appeared that Massa has suddenly started making waves about something that was confirmed nearly 15 years ago?

Bernie did an interview with F1 Insider a week or so ago. He said he knew about the race fixing during the 2008 season before the season completed. Based on Bernies new interview and he now claiming it was already known about, Massa has reacted and said the race should be removed from the calendar.

[Mike Harte]

Yes, Charlie had informed both Bernie and Max what Piquet Snr had told him, but they asked Charlie to investigate it and confirm that it wasn't just more than the rumour that had been floating about. And that didn't happen, I believe, until the following year and that then led to the Council banning Briatore and Symonds.

Possibly, Bernie and Max could have instructed Charlie to have done his questioning prior to the end of the season, but they would still have needed to call the Council together before the the Championship had been decided, but from memory, I don't think that that they had the time.

Hence Charlie only started his investigation the following season.