Ferrari escape further punishment

[molemot]

Not enough evidence!!!! Says Jean Todt. No surprise there, then.....the BBC have a nice clip of him being interviewed after the "hearing". It's rare to hear so much blather in such a short space of time!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8982808.stm

[matk]

There's also a very good analysis though on the BBC which hits the spot for me...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/09/courageous_fia_does_the_right.html

[rogerch]

It's very difficult to hand out massive penalties from breaching a rule that is about to be revoked. So whilst I'm no fan of Ferrari or Todt, it's the right decision IMO.

[ads_green]

The problem is right or wrong the rule was there and ferrari blatantly broke it. At the time of the offence the rule was clearly in place.

The fact the rule looks like it will be binned should have no bearing.

What should have happened is the team should have lost the points but let the points stand for the drivers.

Ferrari have no real chance at the constructors so would have made no difference to them but the drivers championship still open

Is the rule enforceable? hell no. F1 is primarily a team sport and no matter what the drivers say they'd be nowhere without the team. They just get to do the fun bit

The problem is that unless clarrification happens today/tomorrow then what is the state of play for the weekend? The FIA are supposed to bring order to F1 but this decision just makes an uncertain rule more chaotic.

And as for the excuse "insufficient evidence"... well... I'd have preferred a more honest explanation even if it was "the rule we made is crap and we're binning it".

[MPx]

That's pathetic!

If there's a rule in place and its blatantly been broken (not enough evidence indeed!) then that's gratuitous flouting and demands very heavy punishment if for no other reason than to show that the refs decision is final. Obviously other teams do it as well cos its a daft rule, but none of them have been caught doing it on the team radio. If the F1 insiders dont like the rule then its easier to ignore covert transgressions. Its also disappointing that its Ferrari (again). I wonder if Mclaren or Red Bull would have got off so lightly? I suspect not!

The obvious answer is to make it clear to everyone that its a team sport by making the Constructors title the blue riband event and the drivers title icing on the cake. As an F1 fan, I could cope with the implications of that for both the racing and the drivers in the same team. Although I'd guess they'd then have to invent unenforceable rules about the no 2 driver cant back up the pack away from the no 1 etc.

[rocket63]

That was an absolute waste of time. No wonder F1 no longer has any credibility.

So. No teamorders unless you pay $100,000 per pop. Pathetic.

[Iconic Ride]

This topic provides me with an opportunity to ask about something that has aroused my curiosity during every race this year. The commentators for the channel that broadcasts the race(s) in my part of the world always seem to "know" when a radio communication between team and driver(s) is being (or going to be, it seems at times--it's almost psychic!) made. Is this "illusion" done by "tape delay" and then integrated seamlessly into the broadcast, or it there some "signal" from the pits that is publicly available that says "Hey, we're about to punch the mic button, so listen up"?

And is it an FIA requirement that all transmissions be publicly available? And if not, why in hades would Ferrari be dumb enough to openly transmit such obvious instructions as they did in Germany?

Can they, or can they not, speak to their drivers on a discrete frequency?

[USAndretti42]

An imminent radio broadcast is usually announced by a graphic in the bottom right of the screen saying the driver's name followed by "radio" or some such like. They are majorly delayed from the real time broadcast.

I don't know how the broadcasters decide which transmissions to release to the public.

Regarding the decision, had they found Ferrari guilty and increased the penalty, Ferrari would, undoubtedly, appealed dragging the whole matter out much longer so, I suspect, they took the pragmatic route and let it stand as it was. After all, although we all "knew" they used team orders, it would be difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt with the evidence of Smedley's radio call to Massa. At the time, Alonso was faster than Massa so what Smedley said was accurate.

[ramjet]

So if he was faster, why didn't he simply overtake without Massa having it obliquely suggested to him to move out of the way?

[Iconic Ride]

Would have to guess that the electromagnetic wave "massive hint" was Ferrari's way of trying to prevent "team orders" from turning into a "team collection" (a la Vettel/Weber).