I have some difficulty to talk about old, new, etc. For me there is only one set - current rules. What is getting to me about this issue, that the stewards are talking about series of activities during post-race investigation, and then they decide. It took them long time, and it still ends up as controversial decision. That's them sitting on their .... having all time to scratch their pretty hairdo. Meanwhile, what about the driver who has to react in split second, and even if they want to stay clean, how they are supposed to drive to do that, and win some races when they are in clutches of stewards? Point is, some rules are ambiguous, some other rules are half-baked, and some rules are redundant.there has always been talk & this is proof 10 years ago Ferrari got away with everything & now the FIA with ex Ferrari team principal as president is now heavily baised against Ferrari. I agree they have every right to be upset but the way I think of it is that Ferrari wanted more lenient rules & to allow the drivers to race. sort it on track. well they were victorious in that. just very unlucky that they were on wrong side of the "old" & "new" rules
Exactly. He would not be talking like this had both recent controversial calls were transparent and above the board. Can we expect changes? I seriously doubt it. F1 has long history of heated discussions, and nothing really ever changes in directions of simplicity. Question then is, how will Ferrari respond on long run?Piero Ferrari said:..
He said that without "simpler" and "transparent" rules that are then applied consistently, "people become disaffected".
The predicament of being given money for just being Ferrari for one.What predicament?