Current Mercedes

Mercedes GP

FIA Entry: Mercedes GP Petronas F1 Team
Car 7: Michael Schumacher
Car 8: Nico Rosberg
Engine: Mercedes V8
Team Principal: Ross Brawn
Technical Director: Bob Bell
Race Engineer Car 7: Mark Slade
Race Engineer Car 8: Tony Ross

Stats as of end 2010

First Entered 2010
Races Entered 19
Race Wins 0
Pole Positions 0
Fastest Laps 0
Driver World Championships 0
Constructor World Championships 0

Team History

The Mercedes team history splits into two parts. In 1954 the famous pre-war Silver Arrows entered the F1 world championship and recorded a 1-2 at their first race. Fangio went on to win the drivers championship that year and again in 1955. Mercedes withdrew at the end of the 1955 season after the accident which killed 80 spectators at Le Mans which involved one of their cars.

The current team entered F1 in 2010 after Mercedes bought Brawn Grand Prix. Brawn Grand Prix, winners of the Drivers Championship, with Jenson Button, and the constructor’s championship in 2009, grew out of the ashes of Honda’s F1 entry after Honda had withdrawn from F1 at the end of the 2008 season after only a single Grand Prix win for Button in Hungary 2006.

Prior to the Honda takeover in 2006 the team had raced under the name of British America racing which had acquired the assets and race entry of the Tyrrell F1 team in 1999. BAR competed in 118 races without a single victory. The high points for the team were 2 pole positions (both for Button – San Marino 2004 and Canada 2005) and 2nd in the constructors championship in 2004.

Tyrrell were amongst the most successful private F1 teams taking part in 463 Grands Prix, scoring 33 victories and 3 Drivers Championships, all with Jackie Stewart.

2010

Having replaced Button and Barrichello with Nico Rosberg and 7 times WDC Michael Schumacher many expected great things of the new Mercedes team in 2010 but they had an indifferent season.

Rosberg managed 3 podiums for the team but Schumacher, coming back from retirement, struggled with the new cars, tyres and limited testing under the revised regulations. The team finished 4th in the Constructors Championship.

2011

For 2011 Mercedes retain the same driver line up and are hoping for better things from their MGP W02 chassis.

 

[The Artist.....]

That's all I asked.

I got it from the fact that when I asked for clarification as you were attacking Mercedes for their run if wins if you felt the same about Ferrari and Red Bull.

In much the same way you speculated that those who were angry about the way Masi dealt with the climax of the Abu Dhabi GP would not be making the same level of protest had Hamilton gone on to win.

So, when I asked you to clarify your position around winning runs by other teams, your response was to once again state your anti Mercedes sentiments and ignore the Ferrari and Red Bull bit.

Now you have clarified your position on all three in exactly the same way I clearly stated I would be furious with the FIA / Masi had their actions been the same but the drivers reversed.

Now we know where we both stand.

cider_and_toast - For me, had the circumstance been reversed, and it had been Horner banging on to the stewards, I'd have been mighty pissed off with him and Red Bull. (After Silverstone - whilst I may not have said it, I was pissed with Horner for trying to bring the right to review. I'd much rather races are run and finished on the day. When things are changed after the chequered flag, it's always an unedifying sight.

(In the same way as when the Benetton team marched down to the stewards to protest Schumacher's disqualification at Silverstone 1994 - it was completely unedifying)

We could improve F1 no end by:

1. Having no appeals. Referee's decision is final - even if it's the wrong decision. Penalties should normally be imposed in race, and grid penalties are only used if:
   1. The driver has been eliminated from the race due to dangerous driving
   2. The referee did not see the offence at the time (e.g. if it was caught on a security camera)
2. Independent "line-judges" should be on each corner, recording if any offences have taken place, and communicate back to the race director/stewards
3. Teams should not be able to communicate with the race director or the stewards. The race director can, however, send a one-way communication to the teams.
4. The only after-the-event penalties that change the results should be for technical violations.

 

[cider_and_toast]

Teams should not be able to communicate with the race director or the stewards. The race director can, however, send a one-way communication to the teams.

I thought about this but it's impractical because there will always be an occasion when the race director will need a response from the teams so it will have to be two way. Also, there will be occasions when the team need to contact the race director for legitimate reasons.

The teams are already unable to talk to the stewards which is why they direct all their comments to the race director.

As for the rest, it will come as no surprise that I completely disagree with almost all of it.

The reason the refs decision is final in almost every sport is because they apply the letter of the law. The player was either offside or not, the player committed a foul or not, the ball was in or not and so on. In virtually no other sport apart from F1 are rules invented on the hoof and then subsequently retrospectively declared permissable.

If you have subjective laws then you must have leave to appeal them.

Both football and rugby can appeal sending offs or subsequently cite players for violent conduct for example.

There have been examples of results scrubbed, changed, replayed or points removed for illegal infractions.

If F1 consistently applied its own sporting regulations to the letter there would be no need to challenge outcomes but quite clearly they don't. Just look at the farce that is "track limits". It applies to some corners but not others, at some points over the weekend and not others and on some circuits but not others.

You can't run a sport like that

 

[Brogan]

The consistent application of rules is one thing F1 has never been known for.

Either from race to race, or even in the same race.

 

[The Artist.....]

The reason the refs decision is final in almost every sport is because they apply the letter of the law. The player was either offside or not, the player committed a foul or not, the ball was in or not and so on. In virtually no other sport apart from F1 are rules invented on the hoof and then subsequently retrospectively declared permissable.

If you have subjective laws then you must have leave to appeal them.

Both football and rugby can appeal sending offs or subsequently cite players for violent conduct for example.

Almost all of this is not true.

You can't re-run a football match because a referee didn't see an offside (and refuses to go to VAR). You can't re-run a football match because a referee didn't award a penalty when there was a blatant foul. You can't re-run a football match when a referee awards three yellow cards.

When a football player is sent off, and an appeal is submitted, the result of the game is not changed. The only thing that is changed is whether the player faces a subsequent ban. Almost all decisions in sport are subjective, and very few can ever be reversed. You don’t get to replay the football match because a player has been wrongly sent off. The 1966 World Cup isn’t being replayed because of a faulty goal being awarded.

There have been examples of results scrubbed, changed, replayed or points removed for illegal infractions

I can think of one other example in sport where a decision has been changed retrospectively, which was in the pairs ice dance in 2002 - where national bias led to one block of judges marking down one pair. In the end, the award was split between the two.

In terms of races and competitions where there is an objective rule for who finishes ahead I can think of results being scrubbed when teams did illegal things (such as playing an ineligible player), but not when the referee has made a decision on-field.

If F1 consistently applied its own sporting regulations to the letter there would be no need to challenge outcomes but quite clearly they don't. Just look at the farce that is "track limits". It applies to some corners but not others, at some points over the weekend and not others and on some circuits but not others.

That's why you need spotters/line judges on every corner

You can't run a sport like that

Why not? Virtually every sport has a referee's decision (relating to the game in play) is final. F1 is just about the only sport I can think of where results are still up in the air hours after the event. Even horseracing (terrible events that they are) get stewards enquiries over in a very short period of time.

The only other occasions I can think of events where there is a clear finish order having their results changed a long period after the event is when doping offences are involved.

Of course, in order to make this sort of system work, you also need action to be taken against referees if they do make mistakes. This is where football is leaps and bounds ahead of F1.

 

[cider_and_toast]

You are constantly mixing up outcomes with the decisions.

We aren't discussing what action would be taken had the appeal been successful we are discussing how wrong the decision was in the first place.

You have confirmed part of my argument in that if a Ref makes the wrong call on a red card or a ref misses a player commit a violent act (especially in rugby), appeals and retrospective action can take place.

There were two options, let cars pass or do not let cars pass. Masi invented a new rule which didn't allow for equal treatment for all competitors (and I'm not even talking about Hamilton and Verstappen here). A Ref on the field of play cannot change the rules of the game. It's a sending off or it isn't. It's as if the Ref decided to invent a sin bin rule just for that match.

We've already seen subjective decisions challenged this season. Silverstone and Brazil. In each case, right or wrong depending on your opinion, the decision was reviewed.

Also, F1 has a precedent for after the match decisions which we haven't even discussed yet. We have often seen "incident between cars 1 and 2 will be investigated after the race" or "incident with car 1 double yellows" will be investigated after the race. Imagine that in football "the foul between players X and y will be punished after the final whistle"

But I digress, regardless of what eventual outcome there may have been, Masi changed the rules of the game on the hoof. It was not a subjective decision made within the rules but a new rule made up to alter a specific situation that was already well covered within the rules.

There is no precedent for this and going forward it effectively renders the rules pointless if they can be rewritten mid race at the Race Director's whim.

 

[The Artist.....]

Also, F1 has a precedent for after the match decisions which we haven't even discussed yet. We have often seen "incident between cars 1 and 2 will be investigated after the race" or "incident with car 1 double yellows" will be investigated after the race. Imagine that in football "the foul between players X and y will be punished after the final whistle"

Agree - that would be ludicrous in football- I don't understand why F1 insists on using this - the process outlined above would get rid of this. But sometimes in football, the referee incorrectly applies the rules, and sends a player off (or doesn't send a player off). Edit - I've now found an instance of a refereeing error potentially changing the result after the fact - where Brixham vs Bridgwater was ordered to be re-played due to the referee making up a rule (sending a player to the sin-bin, which is allowed in local football, but not in the FA cup).. (However - note that this was not the result being changed, but the game being re-played. If we acknowledge that this was an egregious rewriting of the rules, then a rematch would have been most appropriate).

But I digress, regardless of what eventual outcome there may have been, Masi changed the rules of the game on the hoof. It was not a subjective decision made within the rules but a new rule made up to alter a specific situation that was already well covered within the rules.

There is some interpretation here - I'm not going to get into the wording of the regs (I've done that elsewhere), but part of the problem with F1 is that there are grey areas which are in the unwritten elements. (Such as the agreement that races should always try to finish under green flag conditions).

What happened on Sunday was a cock-up. My best guess about what happened was that Masi had chance to let the cars through to allow for a normal restart (following all the rules) for the last lap, but for one reason or another, chose not to do so.

At some point, he realised that this would be perceived as a decision that would be counter to almost all precedent, and would favour Mercedes. In a half-assed way, he tried to correct for his previous mistake.

For me, this smacks of a mistake, rather than a deliberate attempt to make up new rules. There have been occasions when Hamilton could rightly feel aggrieved (Spa 2008, for instance). But even if it was a mistake, Mercedes shouldn't have been trying to change the order after the event. (As I say, this is akin to Graham Poll awarding 3 yellow cards to a player in the world cup finals).

 

[cider_and_toast]

What happened on Sunday was a cock-up.

At least we agree on something.

So that being said, Mercedes had every right to appeal it on the day and to take that appeal as far as possible.

Masi's "it's called Motor Racing" line told me everything I need to know about his motivation for inventing his own solution. He didn't want the world title to end under a safety car so he let only the cars through between the two main protagonists. It was deliberate, not covered by the rules and unprecedented.

So, I think we are at the stage where you and I are never going to agree on this. So that's where we are at.

 

[The Artist.....]

So that being said, Mercedes had every right to appeal it on the day and to take that appeal as far as possible.

The reason that I'm so against Mercedes appealing this is the question of what result they actually hoped to achieve?

• Reorder the race? That would be unprecedented as well.
• Apply a penalty to Max? That might have had legs for pulling alongside/ahead under the safety car - but I can't see any reason to penalise Verstappen for racing when the track was green...
• A public flogging of Michael Masi?

If there are precedents from other sports, there would only be about 3 possible outcomes:

1. Nullify the results of the race. Result: Verstappen champion
2. Award the race win jointly to Verstappen and Hamilton. Result: Verstappen champion
3. Rerun the race. (Who knows what the result would be).

I deal with appeals regularly in my job, and those submitting an appeal have to state what outcome they are looking for. With an appeal on 48.12, no-one wins.

 

[Hamberg]

What did Mercedes hope to achieve?
Acknowledgement the FIA/Massi screwed up. It was not unlucky, it was not a misunderstanding, it was plain wrong.

 

[cider_and_toast]

Agree with Hamberg.

What action would I want to result from a successful appeal?

Obviously, firstly, Masi should no longer act as the Race Director

From there on, I agree it would be exceedingly difficult to have the result overturned due to the teams not actually having done anything wrong. Obviously Mercedes, had they carried their challenge all the way forward would have sought for the result to be declared on the last lap prior to the safety car deployment. So, if we concede that the result should stand then the action should be on the FIA.

Therefore, Masi should be removed from his role as race director and it should be made clear that he exceeded his authority. There should be a clarification of the safety car rules to ensure they are more robust. An improvement of the rule regarding lapped cars i.e. they should use the pit lane, should be implemented. Finally there should be an apology from the FIA with a statement guaranteeing that their priorities are safety and fair competition over entertainment.

That would probably have to do

 

[Brogan]

One possible outcome of an appeal would have been to declare the race results on the lap prior to Masi fixing the race.

That seems fair to me.

 

[Johnny Carwash]

Mercedes already firing up there car for 2022. Looks like not using any of there development tokens in 2021 may give them a head start for this season coming.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1474036575331889152

 

[The Artist.....]

There seems to be lots of stuff missing from that car... No rear wing, for instance.

McLaren reportedly finished building their first chassis a few days ago as well. (and have crash-tested their chassis as well!)

It sounds like the teams are trying to take as much advantage of the frozen chassis for 2021 to spend this year's budget on next year's car... Those crashes from Haas may be expensive when it comes to next year - as the team might not have as much wiggle room to play with this year's budget cap to pay for some of next year's car...

 

[Dartman]

So who could replace Lewis Hamilton if he decides he's had enough?
Choices to buy out of contract
Leclerc under pressure from Sainz may want to jump
Albon quite cheap as it's Williams and an engine deal possible
Michael Schumacher German and possibly cheap, Haas could do with cash
Ocon?
Riciardo not comfortable at McLaren
Gasly not so cheap RB wouldn't like it
Vettel, he would, but past it
Norris, quick but against Rusell too much of a risk, Riciardo v Verstappen, Webber v Vettel
Not under F1 contract
Hulkenberg
Grosgean
De Vries
Sam Bird
Any other suggestions?

 

[cider_and_toast]

Any other suggestions?

I'd give it a go

 

[F1Brits_90]

Dartman it tough its speculated before & it really is slim picking to find a person of that quality who is available. Lando Norris or Sebastian Vettel is about it

i think it would be Vettel. he's german, experienced & a world champion

 

[Dartman]

i think it would be Vettel. he's german, experienced & a world champion

But would he come in as an equal or No2, I think he may not have the clout to be a No1 as his Aston performance isn't that great

 

[F1Brits_90]

i would say equal, & like 2019 sort it on track. but he should be grateful of the opportunity that wouldnt come his way

 

[Il_leone]

Being Mercedes they prefer the experience and youth combination so Vettel would be good for the hierarchy that he is a 4 x time champ and German. I am sure Laurence and Toto can work a deal if needed if there is a break clause

Alonso - I would not put it beyond him to break his contract so Alpine can put Piastri in the other car

Ocon - He has a 3 year deal at Alpine but surely that is equal or less than the money they would have paid for Hamilton anyway to break it

------------


De Vries - has done the miles and good for Mercedes to expand in the Dutch market using the F E champion but that would mean Mercedes would have to find another driver to fill his F E seat fast

Hulkenberg - he is going to be rusty so may take him a while to be on the pace

Gasly - outside bet - Red Bull may not like it but he should tell them to shove it because he wants to beat Verstappen and not be his lackey

LeClerc - has an expensive contract with Ferrari to break being to 2024

Albon - no because his association with Red Bull

Norris - no because he is Mclaren's future

Ricciardo - not sure after an indifferent season

 

[F1Brits_90]

Alonso is certainly a possible as he if needs be he would go full ron dennis 2007. to make sure they fired him. so he got the drive but he's 40

de vries - im unsure of him yet won F2 at 3rd attempt albeit in probably the weakness year of last 5 beating latifi & ghiotto. then Formula E again is tough to judge because of the lottery of qualifying & as i said on the FE thread, its hard to ever judge the quality of the drivers because normally the drivers who win the race were in the last 2 qualifying groups meaning they had been terrible for most of the season