What should Ferrari's penalty be?

If thats the case then why do the FIA(stewards) send emails to the teams that have to confirm receipt?

 

OK, I gave you a chance to blame your mistake on Benoit, but as you are insisting on it, show me where the regs say what you claim they say.

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html

I'll save you some time: they don't.

 

I only repeated what Benoit said, a guy who normally knows his stuff. Maybe there are some rules/practices that are stored some place else (bylaws?). I dunno. Send him an email and ask him yourself. I bet it is [email protected]

 

I found a better answer:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/2922935.stm

Sounds to me that the FIA came up with the 1 tire rule if a race has been declared a wet race. Fuji was a wet race and if everybody else is on wet tires, the Ferrari guys should have noticed, that they're breaking the one tire rule with their intermediates.

 

That article only talks about only being able to use one wet weather tire at each race (2003).. they couldn't use both full and int wet tires at one race. Obviously the rule has gone out of the window because multiple wet tires can be brought and used at the races now. I don't see the relevance.

 

You are grapsing at straws here. The whole point for Ferrari was to gain an advantage by starting on intermediates BECAUSE all the others were on full wets. A risk that would have never lead to success, therefor a bad choice, but nonetheless taken on legal motives. But feel free to think up more ridiculous arguments to make Ferrari look bad. This is apperantly your forum after all.

 

It doesn't say that, true. But: This can not possibly be all there is regarding F1 rules: You list one document with 39 pages covering the 2007 sporting regulations and another one with 41 pages covering the 2007 technical specs for the cars. That is simply not comprehensive. There is a LOT more stuff regulating F1 that is not covered in the docs you list. For instance Wet Races per se are not even defined in these pages. No wonder you couldn't find the tire rule Benoit refers to.

 

ever heard of Punch and Judy ???

 

Here is part of an article posted on another forum(regarding the fuji race):

Todt did think that it would be a good idea, however, for a new rule to be written in the regulations stipulating that teams start races with extreme tyres in the event of a safety car being used.

"I think it should probably be very wise to write a rule where you say that if you start under the safety car, then you have to fit full wet tyres," he said. "That would probably be a good rule."


So its proven, there is no rule yet.

 

It seems Ferrari may have been given McLaren info by Stepney. I guess the guy's saying he was working both sides of the fence, a-la double agent. Not only did Stepney give Coughlan info but it seems Coughlan gave the same info in a bit of quid pro quo.

My point is there's a lot worse going on than what's being argued here. As was said in another thread, Todt was either trying to get an advantage by using the inters or was just clueless. Either way it cost Kimi what could have been a possible win. Sometimes you gamble and win and sometimes you gamble and loose.

Todt gambled and Kimi lost. As far as team orders well, the way the Ferrari was going through wet tires (who would think they'd be using them up that fast?) I'd say Massa could have used a fresh set the way he drives in the rain.

It happened they got a drive through. A McLaren employee got caught with info he shouldn't the team was docked points the drivers weren't. Maybe Ferrari had some McLaren info too. It's all history.

Let's move on.

 

You're funny

And where, pray tell, are these double secret rules? Anyone? Bueller?

You're getting warmer....

 

I can't believe this thread is still going. I am not digging unto anyone but just wondering. Is there ANYTHING that has not been said already on the subject?

 

Oh, and the numbers on the poll are about as likely to change as Massa winning the WDC.

 

Why not? It is about racing cars. It is not that complicated.

 

Golf only involves hitting a little ball as many times as it takes to get it into a hole - very simple. But the rule book is as thick as a bible. (I may have used a little poetic licence there!)

 

Foolish loss of position was a penalty itself.

 

Even so it is simply not logical to suggest that there are hidden rules, beside the ones that are publicised.

 

umm, no.....that was a direct effect of Ferrari's silly shoice. if they would have been allowed to proceed on intermediates, then both red cars would have ended up in the wall......... it was a safety call to start the race on extreme wets, Ferrari didn't recieve the email in time(riiiight.), but in my opinion they should have started on extreme wets email or not.......either way, they ended up breaking a rule, intentionally or not, a rule was broken and a penalty should be given. But, this is Ferrari and the FIA will not punish them for violating rules as we have seen in the past.

 

You guys who come onto this site and bash Ferrari are pretty lucky. If I were running the site or had any say, it wouldnt be tolerated. IMHO this is a site honoring Ferrari and Italian machinery, and is under no obligation to give the same to any other nation or marque. That being said, I dont like blatant cheating, by Ferrari or anyone else. That nearly half those who responded to a poll on Fchat would accept any driver to Ferrari, no matter how deceitful or devious or how far they would go to cheat, I find very troubling. That isnt sportsmanship.

I honestly cant believe Mr Ferrari would have stayed in F1 with it as political as it has become. I dont believe he would have stood for the rulings of the FIA. I dont believe he would have tolerated people he placed in top positions to bring shame to his company. Everyone has opinions, some good, some not so good. I dont look at F1 racing any differently than young kids with soapbox cars. IOW, rules of integrity and good sportsmanship should rank highest over all else. If your kid leaves his car out for everyone to see in a public place, or where people can walk up and snap pictures, thats your kids fault. If the boys watch your kids car and can determine differences in engineering by observing it, great. If your kid alters something in some grey area of the rules, or uses something outside the rules to gain an advantage, some penalty should be applied, but nothing to severe. But if someone who helps your kid build his car gives away your kids secrets and all his cars plans to another kid, even MY kid, that is theft, and they should be penalised and disqualified.

Personally, I am so fed up with the whole mess I would rather see Ferrari leave F1 for a while. I like Todt, but if he is cheating in some way, he needs to go. Alonso should never be allowed to drive for the Scuderia. When I see a car roll across the line after hundreds of miles, I want to trust they got there with hard work, good sportsmanship and integrity. I have been watching racing off and on my whole life, over 40 years. I have had other loves besides Ferrari, but more often I cheered for particular drivers as much as the machine. I didnt cheer for Mario because he drove for Ferrari, I cheered for Mario because he was a good driver and was a more or less decent guy. Same for Stewart, Fitipaldi, Villenueve, many others. I cant say I really liked MS. He seems decent enough, but there are to many references to blatant cheating that it brings a lot of the victories into question. And its sad because he was such a marvelous driver, he never needed to cheat.

I dont, and I wont wave a Ferrari flag if I feel they cheated to gain advantage. It really is, for me, just like soapbox derby. If I found me kid cheating, she wouldnt need to wait around to be caught officially. Daddy would pack it up and go home, and probably give the car to someone more worthy. Some of you people need to figure out what real integrity is and force it back into motorsport. But just so everyone knows where I stand. The allegations and evidence against McLaren should have totally disqualified them. Clear through next year. If Ferrari are found to have done the same thing, and the evidence comes to light, the same should apply to them. I guess when the old man died we lost a lot more than a car builder.

 

Paul, I can appreciate your comments............but wouldn't it be really boring if everyone who posted was a Ferrari F1 fan??
I'm not a team fan, I'm more of a driver's fan.........I happen to not like the current Ferrari drivers, and IMVHO, Kimmi is the only one that deserves to be there at the moment. I agree with you that any cheater should be punished, but we both know things don't work the way they should.... I think it's pretty safe to say that all teams cheat in one way or another, some get punished and some don't..........it is what it is.

 

You really haven´t been paying attention all those years, have you?

It was Ferrari´s call to start on intermediates and their call alone, silly or not. It is a gamble at the time of the decision it could´ve just as well have paid off.

The FIA rules do not state that it is mandatory to start on full wets of a race is declared a wet race.

It is confirmed by all parties involved that Ferrari didn´t receive the email, so therefor no punishment is handed out.

And please give me an example if a situation where it is fact that Ferrari broke the rules, yet the FIA didn´t impose the penalty. And before you jump in with Malaysia 1999, I suggest you study that case again.

 

I agree, I wasn't suggesting that. Like in golf I'm sure there will be rules covering nearly every eventuality and if the rules on wet races (for example the 5 car length rule) weren't in the quoted documents I imagine they will be in some other papers that we haven't seen.

 

+1

I'm not suggesting there are "hidden rules" or anything obscure, but any definitive legal document (e.g. constitution or in this case the 40 pages from FIA) has bylaws and addenda. When a race is declared a "Wet Race" a sign is hung out on the grid with the letters "WR" so eveybody knows now the rules for wet races apply. The 40 pages don't even discuss wet races, so there must be more to the rules than this.

I remember a conversation between the Speed guys a couple of years ago about some technicalities and Varsha was asking Matchett about it with a line like "Steve, you read the 300+ pages of the regulations book, what do you think?".

 

So what you are saying is that you have no interest in honest intellectual debate? ou are saying that you believe opinions on this site need to be censored?

If some one comments about an incident in which Ferrari cheated, would that deserve to be removed? At what point does debate cross the line in your mind? Does this mean that no one can comment on Schumacher's on-track antics as, in your opinion, that would be Ferrari bashing? Does this mean we cannot criticize Ferrari if they sign Alonso? Or does this mean we are obligated to criticize Ferrari if they sign Alonso and, if so, wouldn;t this require censorship based on the first point?

Your statement is ridiculous. This is a discussion forum, not a sycophantic gathering.

You clearly don't know the first thing about Enzo Ferrari.

 

+1

Luckily we don't live in a dictatorship, but a country where freedom of speech is cherished.