Read the article and quotes rather than the headline
YDT?
- Thread starter KekeTheKing
- Start date
I did...
In that case I owe you an apology. I just interpreted from your earlier comments that you thought Red Bulls argument that Mercedes has gained an unfair performance advantage was valid which it does not seem to be.
Good point. I also apologize to Mephistopheles - I was unfairly personal in my remark.
My remark was in the context of several of what I consider fallacies that were posted on this thread:
1) the assertion that Mercedes had more poles since the Pirelli test than before
2) the assertion that Mercedes had solved their race tire degradation problem during the Pirelli test
3) the assertion that the Penalty was less than appropriate because Mercedes had the opportunity to test new parts during the Pirelli test, and the other teams could not test parts during the YDT. Both of which are also incorrect.
The bottom line is the World championship may be decided by a tribunal hearing rather than allowing the engineered and drivers to fight fair. That is not sport.
The more I think about this, the more I think Mercedes should petition for access to the YDT and especially the tire test. The tires for 2H13 are new. Mercedes will be the only team racing on those tires blind in Hungary. That is a safety risk as well as an unfair competition.
Okay I would like to ask you a question Batman
Obviously you don't have to answer but I will ask anyway.
If you feel that Mercedes exclusion from the YTD is unfair and yet it is a fact that Mercedes were found guilty in the tribunal, also it is a fact that it was Mercedes themselves who put forward their own punishment which was to be excluded from the YTD and that the punishment they themselves asked for, was accepted and agreed by the tribunal and the FIA.
The aftermath of the punishment met out was proclaimed by the majority of teams, media and fans to be too lenient, and they felt that the FIA were hamstrung by Mercedes (I did not say blackmailed.) due to the fact that they are a major player in F1 and the FIA could not afford to lose an engine manufacturer due to the engine regulation changes for 2014.
And so here's the question.
Why do you believe that Mercedes have been treated unfairly and should be allowed all rights and privileges of joining and taking part in the YTD? Also what do you believe would have been a fitting punishment if any?
I'm just curious that's all, like I said you are under no obligation to answer. Having said that I would welcome anyone elses thoughts on what I have just posted...
Obviously you don't have to answer but I will ask anyway.
If you feel that Mercedes exclusion from the YTD is unfair and yet it is a fact that Mercedes were found guilty in the tribunal, also it is a fact that it was Mercedes themselves who put forward their own punishment which was to be excluded from the YTD and that the punishment they themselves asked for, was accepted and agreed by the tribunal and the FIA.
The aftermath of the punishment met out was proclaimed by the majority of teams, media and fans to be too lenient, and they felt that the FIA were hamstrung by Mercedes (I did not say blackmailed.) due to the fact that they are a major player in F1 and the FIA could not afford to lose an engine manufacturer due to the engine regulation changes for 2014.
And so here's the question.
Why do you believe that Mercedes have been treated unfairly and should be allowed all rights and privileges of joining and taking part in the YTD? Also what do you believe would have been a fitting punishment if any?
I'm just curious that's all, like I said you are under no obligation to answer. Having said that I would welcome anyone elses thoughts on what I have just posted...
Mephistopheles
First of all I want to point out that Mercedes position wasn't that they should recieve this penalty, but rather that they did not do anything illegal and that their test was comparable to the Ferrari one which is deemed legal. If Ferrari goes scot free, so should Mercedes. I agree with this position. I think they made a mistake in suggesting a penalty for what should happen if the Tribunal disagreed with their defense.
If I accept the tribunals perspective that this was a breach of the rules due to an error of judgement made with the best intentions, then I would say the penalty should level the playing field but not be punitive (I.e. Mercedes should not be put at a net disadvantage). Now since in my judgement the test only gave Mercedes insight into 2014 tires, they should be excluded from one 2014 tire testing event. The test did not give Mercedes the opportunity to test new parts or to test 2H13 tires, so Mercedes should not be excluded from the YDT. To exclude them would be punitive, and if the tribunal accepts there was no malice and that FIA delegates failed to provide clear guidance, then a punitive punishment is not appropriate.
Some will argue that the Pirelli test also covered 2013 tires, but as far as I know those tires were not tires that are being used. So if anything the test was a red herring for Mercedes.
First of all I want to point out that Mercedes position wasn't that they should recieve this penalty, but rather that they did not do anything illegal and that their test was comparable to the Ferrari one which is deemed legal. If Ferrari goes scot free, so should Mercedes. I agree with this position. I think they made a mistake in suggesting a penalty for what should happen if the Tribunal disagreed with their defense.
If I accept the tribunals perspective that this was a breach of the rules due to an error of judgement made with the best intentions, then I would say the penalty should level the playing field but not be punitive (I.e. Mercedes should not be put at a net disadvantage). Now since in my judgement the test only gave Mercedes insight into 2014 tires, they should be excluded from one 2014 tire testing event. The test did not give Mercedes the opportunity to test new parts or to test 2H13 tires, so Mercedes should not be excluded from the YDT. To exclude them would be punitive, and if the tribunal accepts there was no malice and that FIA delegates failed to provide clear guidance, then a punitive punishment is not appropriate.
Some will argue that the Pirelli test also covered 2013 tires, but as far as I know those tires were not tires that are being used. So if anything the test was a red herring for Mercedes.
I never doubted that Mercedes would petition, it would be remiss of them if they didn't, but I do doubt they have any chance of winning the petition and if by chance they do win I don't believe the other teams will take it laying down...
Batman thank you for answering my question while I personally do not agree with your answer at least I can see the logic in it.
This is the way I see it..
Whether or not Mercedes gained any advantage from the test or not is, irrelevant. The only relevant issue is that they broke the rules on testing (It was found that Ferrari did not break the rules so cannot in my view be used in this argument.) and had to receive some form of punishment, to use this argument as a defense is a bit like a shoplifter saying "Yes I did steal that jacket but the colour didn't suit me so I never wore it."
The other defense used was the "We didn't know were doing anything wrong." argument, unfortunately this is a non argument as Ignorantia legis neminem excusat, applies (Ignorance of the law is no excuse.)
Finally, the "It wasn't me it was him." tactic as used by children everywhere is just that, childish...
Taking all this into account I believe (And it may be only me that does so.) that the punishment meted out was probably a fair one, if anything verging slightly on the lenient side...
This is the way I see it..
Whether or not Mercedes gained any advantage from the test or not is, irrelevant. The only relevant issue is that they broke the rules on testing (It was found that Ferrari did not break the rules so cannot in my view be used in this argument.) and had to receive some form of punishment, to use this argument as a defense is a bit like a shoplifter saying "Yes I did steal that jacket but the colour didn't suit me so I never wore it."
The other defense used was the "We didn't know were doing anything wrong." argument, unfortunately this is a non argument as Ignorantia legis neminem excusat, applies (Ignorance of the law is no excuse.)
Finally, the "It wasn't me it was him." tactic as used by children everywhere is just that, childish...
Taking all this into account I believe (And it may be only me that does so.) that the punishment meted out was probably a fair one, if anything verging slightly on the lenient side...
Mercedes received a reprimand. Which is a nice way of saying, we don't really have anything to punish you for.
And Mercedes' self imposed absence from the YDT fit the bill at the time, but the YDT is no longer the same. And when the basis of the changes are for safety purposes, it's highly questionable that any team be excluded from testing under these grounds.
And Mercedes' self imposed absence from the YDT fit the bill at the time, but the YDT is no longer the same. And when the basis of the changes are for safety purposes, it's highly questionable that any team be excluded from testing under these grounds.
I do not believe that Mercedes can petition on the grounds of safety as there will be ten teams testing the new tyres and any safety issues will show up regardless of their presence at the test or not, also Mercedes will have adequate time to use the new tyres in the FP's before the race in Hungary, at best Merc maybe at a slight disadvantage for one race after that all this will be meaningless, this ban is still one hell of alot better than any alternative punishment they could have received upto and including exclusion from the championship ...
Once again....it's difficult to punish someone for something you've already approved. They were never going to receive anything resembling exclusion, from races or championship.
And Pirelli's take on the situation is that when the tires are used as designed, they are completely safe. The opportunists sensed their chance however.
And Pirelli's take on the situation is that when the tires are used as designed, they are completely safe. The opportunists sensed their chance however.
You are correct there is no way Merc would have been excluded from the championship, unfortunately the same cannot be said about teams of lesser importance, if it were they who had carried out the test and found themselves in the hot seat, I believe McLaren would have been made to pay a far heavier price for the same offence and Marussia would probably have been kicked out of F1 altogether, but that's politics and indeed life itself for you....
Il_leone
World Champion
Batman
You know the most obvious penalty would be to strip Mercedes of their win in Monaco and guess who profits Red Bull but then they would make Pirelli look stupid for putting Mercedes in such a position and Pirelli said they were only doing it because the FIA allows them
A right mess of politics
You know the most obvious penalty would be to strip Mercedes of their win in Monaco and guess who profits Red Bull but then they would make Pirelli look stupid for putting Mercedes in such a position and Pirelli said they were only doing it because the FIA allows them
A right mess of politics
I think perspectives like yours (which is a very common perspective among the English) ruin the sport.
As a viewer I want to see fair competition. I don't want to see races and championships determined by punishments that hurt the team more than the benefit that they accrued from breaking the rules. In that scenario the championship is determined by the tribunal not by the engineers and drivers. American sporting authorities like the NBA are much better at this - their authorities focus on the entertainment - keep the players in the game - don't let the ref decide the match.
Now you may argue that if the punishment purely evens things out and doesn't set the cheating team back then how do you prevent cheating more often? The answer to that is fines and shame. Mercedes Benz, McLaren, Ferrari, and Red Bull are businesses with global brands. Shame hurts them. Large fines cause principals to be dragged in front of the board of directors to account for their behavior, and may call into question the company's participation in the sport. That is a big deterrent. For smaller teams, fines can make the difference between survival or not.
Finally I reject your analogy to criminal law (your shoplifting example). Criminal Law does not apply in sporting events. Can you imagine if during a football match, one player kicks another player in the leg. And instead of getting a card from the ref, a policeman walks onto the field and starts taking witness statements and then arrests the offending player for GBH?
Actually Batman the offence was dealt with in a lawful tribunal and so Ignorantia legis neminem excusat does apply and the offence was committed outside of a racing event and outside of the FIA's control. also a lot of English sports do in fact have laws and not rules, Rugby and golf to name but two, a professional golf player caught cheating will be banned for life from the sport absolutely no questions asked even if that player was Tiger Woods, and your analogy of a foul in football is erroneous a ref may give a red card at the time of the offence but the player can still face criminal proceedings outside of the sport, sportsmen and women are not above the law in terms of GBH, ABH and racial remarks made on the playing field, and I for one am glad of that..
I will let it slip that you have just insulted an entire nation with your comments about the English perspective on grounds of not wanting to develop hostilities across the pond.....
Maybe a football player should kick the shit out of another player and use the defence yeah but we were only playing a game and anyway I didn't know it was against the rules....
I have given you my reasons for rejecting your arguments and have been good enough to say that I understand your reasoning and logic, but your latest post only leaves me with the impression that, if it had been any team other than Mercedes under scrutiny then you would not be defending them in such a manner I can only assume also that this is because Lewis Hamilton drives for Merc...
edit
When a player is given a red card he is sent off this is a punishment and not a field leveling activity it punishes the player and the team.
I will let it slip that you have just insulted an entire nation with your comments about the English perspective on grounds of not wanting to develop hostilities across the pond.....
Maybe a football player should kick the shit out of another player and use the defence yeah but we were only playing a game and anyway I didn't know it was against the rules....
I have given you my reasons for rejecting your arguments and have been good enough to say that I understand your reasoning and logic, but your latest post only leaves me with the impression that, if it had been any team other than Mercedes under scrutiny then you would not be defending them in such a manner I can only assume also that this is because Lewis Hamilton drives for Merc...
edit
When a player is given a red card he is sent off this is a punishment and not a field leveling activity it punishes the player and the team.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Unfortunately Mephistopheles, you have given your reasons whilst ignoring salient facts, intentionally or otherwise. It is no coincidence that the outcome of the IT was broadly in line with the detailed posts I made on this subject back in the first half of June. That is because I read copious amounts of information from all of the sources i could get my hands and then applied some basic common sense. It was not hard to look at it in a fairly objective, non-judgmental or prejudicial way, even though I detest the whole "mess with the tyres to spice up the racing" angle
The key fact that seems to be consistently overlooked in arguing for Mercedes' balls to be chopped off, was the failure of the FIA to draft a proper set of rules specific to Pirelli managed and run tyre tests. In giving dispensation for Pirell's 1,000Km tests, there was some guidance in a singular document about setting them up, but an actual framework for running them did not exist. It is also questionable whether the lines of communication were clearly defined either. Hopefully those issues will now be rectified. We live in hope.
Anyway, in making each party in the case (i.e. Pirelli, Mercedes and the FIA) share equally the costs of the Tribunal, and cover their own individual expenses, the IT sent a clear message. That is that the IT recognised that Mercedes and Pirelli had taken steps to establish a legitimate test but, in 'partnership' with FIA officials, had failed to ensure the test was ratified by the FIA top brass. The biggest omission was clearly in relation to the car and drivers, but again there were no conditions on that defined by the FIA's dispensation.
Further, as it has now become known that Charlie Whiting knew the test was taking place at the time the FIA was in a position to nip in the bud had they realised the shit storm that was to follow. That little chestnut just adds to the FIA's culpability with regard to hat was really a communications and process failure.
None of the events in Test-gate amount to cheating. As is so often the case the knub of the issue was down to good old human fallibility. The day that humans achieve perfection they will no longer need to exist. Happily we will get plenty more opportunities to see the best of the best make complete asses of themselves when the next "gate-gate" arrives.
I just hope that people will be able to chew the cud about it without getting so nasty and vindictive about the parties involved because, actually, that is not nice reading.
Two of the posts referred to are here:
http://cliptheapex.com/threads/merc...t-pirelli-tyre-tests.6253/page-15#post-200993
http://cliptheapex.com/threads/merc...t-pirelli-tyre-tests.6253/page-12#post-200420
The key fact that seems to be consistently overlooked in arguing for Mercedes' balls to be chopped off, was the failure of the FIA to draft a proper set of rules specific to Pirelli managed and run tyre tests. In giving dispensation for Pirell's 1,000Km tests, there was some guidance in a singular document about setting them up, but an actual framework for running them did not exist. It is also questionable whether the lines of communication were clearly defined either. Hopefully those issues will now be rectified. We live in hope.
Anyway, in making each party in the case (i.e. Pirelli, Mercedes and the FIA) share equally the costs of the Tribunal, and cover their own individual expenses, the IT sent a clear message. That is that the IT recognised that Mercedes and Pirelli had taken steps to establish a legitimate test but, in 'partnership' with FIA officials, had failed to ensure the test was ratified by the FIA top brass. The biggest omission was clearly in relation to the car and drivers, but again there were no conditions on that defined by the FIA's dispensation.
Further, as it has now become known that Charlie Whiting knew the test was taking place at the time the FIA was in a position to nip in the bud had they realised the shit storm that was to follow. That little chestnut just adds to the FIA's culpability with regard to hat was really a communications and process failure.
None of the events in Test-gate amount to cheating. As is so often the case the knub of the issue was down to good old human fallibility. The day that humans achieve perfection they will no longer need to exist. Happily we will get plenty more opportunities to see the best of the best make complete asses of themselves when the next "gate-gate" arrives.
I just hope that people will be able to chew the cud about it without getting so nasty and vindictive about the parties involved because, actually, that is not nice reading.
Two of the posts referred to are here:
http://cliptheapex.com/threads/merc...t-pirelli-tyre-tests.6253/page-15#post-200993
http://cliptheapex.com/threads/merc...t-pirelli-tyre-tests.6253/page-12#post-200420
Similar threads
- Article
