Good point -WBF1-, in which case the two situations aren't really comparable.A comprehensive write up on the tyre farce: Italian GP: F1's tyre controversy. Know the whole story
In what appears to be a case of miscommunication, the FIA had not been informed that Pirelli usually accepts the earlier measurement – with the tyres fully heated in their still connected blankets – as its definitive official "starting pressure."
When Bauer did his extra checks, it was at a stage when Pirelli had already accepted the Mercedes tyres as "legal", while knowing that, with the blankets disconnected, the temperature and pressure could only drop.
The Stewards also accepted that once the cars started moving, the tyres heated up again, and the pressures went up. Indeed, data from the cars showed that throughout the race the Mercedes tyres stayed well above the minimum requirement, and the FIA was satisfied by that.
Every team and car has telemetry monitoring tyre pressures, Mercedes showed that once the car was running and tyres up to temperature their pressures were well above the minimum requirement.Though it was accepted that Hamilton ran with reduced tyre pressures on his Mercedes, it was deemed the team had followed correct protocol as set out by the regulations and thus had not intended to gain an advantage. As a result, the decision was taken not to punish Hamilton with any form of penalty, with the protocol itself now being reviewed instead.
Your example is completely irrelevant because Pirelli is a supplier to the FIA and supplies all the teams in the context of their FIA contract. Shell is a supplier to Ferrari and quite clearly in the Ferrari camp from a competitive perspective (when Ferrari wins, Shell is beating Petronas, Total and Esso). Pirelli has no incentive to help out Mercedes, but Shell has a clear incentive to help out Ferrari.It is a fairly new situation for a supplier to determine when a particular regulation is enforceable and when it isn't. If Ferrari were caught running illegal fuel, would it be ok for Shell to say "well, it was fine when we put it in"?
I jest of course. Perhaps the FIA should ask for expressions of interest for someone else to enforce their rules.
I know, I was just messing about. Still, manufacturers do form relationships with tyre suppliers for supply to new road vehicles, which are presumably lucrative for the tyre companies involved. And Pirelli might find Lewis Hamilton a more marketable representative for their products than, say, Sebastian Vettel. So while I'm sure you're right, it is a bit of an odd and unwelcome situation.Your example is completely irrelevant