FIA Ferrari's team orders WMSC hearing

[sportsman]

.Except we boo and hiss everytime a Ferrari or anyone connected with Ferrari appears on screen.

This is usual in my household

Ha during the 90's watching with my Dad he would mutter "arsehole" under his breath everytime Schumacher appeared

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Speshal said:
Ha during the 90's watching with my Dad he would mutter "arsehole" under his breath everytime Schumacher appeared

I like your dad.

 

[cider_and_toast]

I tend to think that the WMSC took the view that Ferrari had already been punished by the Stewards at the race and in the press thereafter. Perhaps the WMSC legal team had already looked at the case and suggested that while everyone knows that it was a team order, it would be difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Ferrari, by accepting the original stewards puishment were in all likelyhood thinking that by doing that they could stave off further punishment down the line. If they had lodged an appeal there and then and the case gone to a full hearing against them the punishment could have been increased.

I agree with TBY that there is no point clamping down on a 1-2 team order and not clamping down on a 3-4 or lower team order.

I believe that the team orders rule should be removed from the books as it is quite clearly un-workable in F1. The rights and wrongs of team orders are a seperate issue but I can't see any obvious way of banning them from the sport. Has having the ban in place actually stopped any team from doing it ?? absolutely not so what's the point of it?

 

[sportsman]

The problem was that the stewards gave the wrong penalty.They imposed a fine.What they should and could have done was give Alonso a time penalty which would have given Massa the win, and relegated Alonso to 2nd place.
There is a whole range of time penalties available to them from the International Sporting Code.

153. Scale of penalties
Penalties may be inflicted as follows in order of increasing
severity :
? reprimand (blame);
? fines;
? time penalty;
? exclusion;
? suspension;
? disqualification.
Time penalty means a penalty expressed in minutes and/or
seconds.Any one of the above penalties can only be inflicted after an
enquiry has been held and, in case of one of the last three, the
concerned party must be summoned to give them the opportunity
of presenting their defence.
For the FIA Formula One World Championship and the FIA
World Rally Championship, a penalty consisting of the withdrawal
of points over the whole of the Championship may be imposed

 

[siffert_fan]

To me, it doesn't seem that the FIA is favoring Ferrari as much as they are continuing to coddle a certain driver from Spain. This driver has been at the center of virtually every scandal in F1 since 2007, yet has NEVER received any form of punishment, indeed he has been allowed to profit from the misdeeds with impunity.

By the way, Speshsal, how does your dad react when this driver appears on tv?

 

[Speshal]

By the way, Speshsal, how does your dad react when this driver appears on tv?

He's fairly apathetic towards that certain driver.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

To me, it doesn't seem that the FIA is favoring Ferrari as much as they are continuing to coddle a certain driver from Spain. This driver has been at the center of virtually every scandal in F1 since 2007, yet has NEVER received any form of punishment, indeed he has been allowed to profit from the misdeeds with impunity.

You could be onto something here, but I don't think its the driver who is the deciding factor, its more likely to be due to the amount of money brought to the sport by a certain bank who sponsor said driver.

 

[ATL11]

To me, it doesn't seem that the FIA is favoring Ferrari as much as they are continuing to coddle a certain driver from Spain. This driver has been at the center of virtually every scandal in F1 since 2007, yet has NEVER received any form of punishment, indeed he has been allowed to profit from the misdeeds with impunity.

You could be onto something here, but I don't think its the driver who is the deciding factor, its more likely to be due to the amount of money brought to the sport by a certain bank who sponsor said driver.

Think we all know this decision had a little bit of politics in it...

It's done now, at least if this had happened say 7 years ago, FIA would have overturned Ferrari's $100k fine, and made all other teams pay a fine of $100k instead cause it was their fault for not pushing Schuey....

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

I see Michael Cobbler would like to assist in reviewing the 'Team Orders' rules:

I bet he would!

Schumacher: "Woohoo, Team Orders to be allowed again!"
Edit: Liuzzi (to himself, through fixed grin): "Yeah, remind me never to be your teammate"

 

[ATL11]

I see Michael Cobbler would like to assist in reviewing the 'Team Orders' rules:

I bet he would!

Schumacher: "Woohoo, Team Orders to be allowed again!"
Sutil (to himself, through fixed grin): "Yeah, remind me never to be your teammate"

Line 1 of your contract - "you are not allowed to race, compete or overtake your team mate....

 

[teabagyokel]

NB: That is not Adrian Sutil.

That is Vitantonio Liuzzi.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

teabagyokel said:
NB: That is not Adrian Sutil.

That is Vitantonio Liuzzi.

Of course it is.

 

[racecub]

Speshal said:
Ha during the 90's watching with my Dad he would mutter "bumhole" under his breath everytime Schumacher appeared

I like your dad.

That dad is class!!!

 

[Brogan]

One thing which hasn't been really discussed is the fact that much was made of McLaren and Hamilton lying to the stewards in Australia 2009.

Bearing in mind Ferrari have been found guilty of team orders, and assuming Alonso's and Massa's testimonies denied this, as did Ferrari themselves, then aren't they guilty of the same thing.

I must say I'm still struggling to understand how the team can be guilty and yet at the same time there is insufficient proof

 

[sportsman]

Agreed Brogan.It is odd.
But the WMSC knew that if they imposed any further sanctions Ferrari would take the matter to a civil court.
Neither the FIA or the WMSC could afford for this to happen because without doubt in a "real court" Ferari would have won their case.
Both the FIA and WMSC are painfully aware of their limitations in imposing sanctions.Ferrari accepted the fine but probably paid it accompianed with a lawyers letter saying that they had accepted their punishment "without predujice".
Now the FIA have said that drivers committing offences on the road may result in them losing their licence.
But that only applies to their competition licence.They can leave the hearing get in their car and drive away quite legally.

 

[Galahad]

I believe that the team orders rule should be removed from the books as it is quite clearly un-workable in F1. The rights and wrongs of team orders are a seperate issue but I can't see any obvious way of banning them from the sport. Has having the ban in place actually stopped any team from doing it ?? absolutely not so what's the point of it?

^ What he said

 

[cider_and_toast]

One thing which hasn't been really discussed is the fact that much was made of McLaren and Hamilton lying to the stewards in Australia 2009.

Bearing in mind Ferrari have been found guilty of team orders, and assuming Alonso's and Massa's testimonies denied this, as did Ferrari themselves, then aren't they guilty of the same thing.

I must say I'm still struggling to understand how the team can be guilty and yet at the same time there is insufficient proof

I think this has come up before in relation to another stewards punishment. In my view the Hamilton case was pretty clear. He comitted what a lawyer would call perjury in so much as he told a deliberate lie in order to gain a favourable verdict in front of the stewards. In his case it was "were you off the track when you were passed by Trulli?" (or words to that effect) to which Hammy told an lie.

Now in the case of Alonso/Massa/Ferrari versus the stewards, they were presenting evidence in their defence which didn't involve them committing the act of perjury. For example, if they were asked by the stewards "Did the team order you to let Alonso pass?" Massa could easily claim "no, they were just letting me know that he was faster than me". We know of course, that at no time did the words "Let Alonso pass" come from anyone at Ferrari so Massa isn't committing perjury he's speaking in his defence. Now if the question was "Did you deliberatly slow on the exit to turn whatever to let Alonso pass in the belief that you had recieved instructions to do so from the team?" The answer to that would be perjury if Massa said no and telemetry could prove otherwise. Of course this is where the whole issue hangs up because the FIA obviously believe that it can't prove it's case totally.