Alfa Romeo Forums banner
341 - 360 of 407 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Not sure what happened there that I posted without meaning to. With that said, the FIA is a joke! I can't believe they penalized Alonso after the race but nothing for Perez when is endplate went flying. What Stroll did is unbelievable. A 3 place grid penalty is laughable. I hope he at least had some penalty points on his license for that dangerous move. And how tough is the Alpine built that it can take that kind of a hit and keep going seemingly unfazed?
Dave
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,544 Posts
Discussion Starter · #342 ·
The penalties as they are now are simply nonsensical.


  • Russell causes a collision, taking out the polesitter on L1T1 ... 5 seconds
  • Gasly dawdles a little behind the SC for a few seconds ... 5 seconds
  • Perez and Russell drive with broken wings for most of the race ... no penalty
  • Albon holds position after overtaking off the track ... 5 seconds + 1 point on SL (worse penalty than Russell's)
  • Stroll causes a collision, taking out Alonso ... 3 grid positions in Mexico + 2 SL points (worse penalty than Russel's)
  • Latifi causes a collision ... 5 grid positions in Mexico + 2 SL points (worse penalty than Russel's)
  • Alonso loses the mirror damaged by Stroll's late move ... 30 seconds and loss of all points for the race, when the protest was filed late, when there was no warning or black & orange flag given, and when Bauer had said post-race that the car was legal. (worse penalty than Russel's or any of the others)
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
I have to say I don't agree that any overspend can be allowed. And I do not care what it was spent on, it made their car better. Motor racing at its core is cheating, and I find it amazing that the FIA do not appear to understand this.

When a series is a professional series the rules are read and read and read and read over and over again looking for advantages. If they create a cost cap with a % tolerance for over spend, you can guarantee that the smart and competitive teams will use every single sent of that tolerance, and over spending MEANS their future cars have a leg up and so it cannot be allowed.

The FIA have to stop being "bought out" by these cheaters and enforce the rules. I'd be happy with RedBull having to race next season with 100% the same cars with NO development permitted at all, i.e. a complete freeze on their car.

Currently I believe staff members of the FIA are hired from the local primary school ... very disappointing.
Pete
ps: Just recently the FIA have:
1. permitted Horner to get the race director to change his mind directly resulting in WDC for his driver which was otherwise 100% Lewis' (and I'm no Lewis fan)
2. permitted their favourite team to over spend and win both of this years championships ... who is going to audit the FIA's bank accounts?
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
And how tough is the Alpine built that it can take that kind of a hit and keep going seemingly unfazed?
Dave
Yeah, utterly amazing!

I suspect the team boss has told his engineers to reduce their safety margin after that incident! :D
Pete
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Pete, the rules are new and like all rules, one can expect teams to push the envelope. Is spending money on an improved work environment for staff ( free lunches ) at the factory performance enhancing? What if they purchased leather, lumbar adjustable office chairs? What if they built a new state of the art gym, or put in a sauna, or provided taxis for female staff to get home after dark? What about free uniforms?

If rumours are true, I could see why Red Bull would honestly believe that free lunches/after hours dinners were not covered in the cost cap. I can also see why Red Bull would think that paying someone who has signed with another team to stay away during the balance of his contract should not be included under the cap. Regardless, it seems clear that Red Bull did not attempt to cover any of this up. Remember, honest accountants can honestly disagree!

On the other hand, if the report concludes that Red Bull intentionally failed to dislcose, or covered up expenses, their actions are fraudulent and deserving of very serious penalties!
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
Valid, but the only one I agree that doesn't help their performance is to pay the employee to keep away ... but it still enables them to get said employee which of course does help RB.

In the end rules that are simple work best. Just don't over spend!

Btw they over spent by ~8 million ... that's not just a couple of lunches
Pete
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
What really bothers me about Alonso’s penalty is not just that it was illogical, inconsistent and extreme ( even with a 10 second penalty he would not have lost a place ), but it undermines one of the greatest performances of his career. His words, not mine.

After a violent crash that winded him, with virtually no delay he got the car back to the pits and while still frightened, resumed at the very back of the pack. He then, after a couple of laps checking out the car, started pushing and drove brilliantly back to 6th place, preserving his tires for over 40 laps until they faded on the last lap, when Norris was finally able to get past him on much fresher tires.

Remember, this was not a one stop strategy - like Norris and Vettel he had made two stops, one of which was extremely long (involving not just a tire change but an inspection of the tub/suspension and replacement of the nose ). All of this following a stop on track and a slow drive back to the pits.

Sadly, the 30 second penalty imposed negated his entire remarkable performance, dropping him back to 15th place.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Pete, if it is around 8 mil, I’ll agree with you. But I’ve also heard of numbers under 1 million. We’ll know soon and at least unlike Ferrari’s illegal engine a few years ago, the findings and the settlement/penalty will be made public.
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
Pete, if it is around 8 mil, I’ll agree with you. But I’ve also heard of numbers under 1 million. We’ll know soon and at least unlike Ferrari’s illegal engine a few years ago, the findings and the settlement/penalty will be made public.
Ditto. And I guess this is why there needs to be a tolerance, but IMO the tolerances should equate out to no more than 1 million

Apparently it was $1.8m: Revealed: Four reasons for Red Bull’s cost cap overspend
Pete
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Pete, thanks for that. If of the 1.8 million overspend, 800 k is to get Fallows to go away, and some unspecified amount is for taxes that may be subject to a rebate ( and therefore would not be an expense at all! ) and more is for spare parts carry over based upon a rule change this year ( and how could they prepare for, let alone account for that on last year’s budget? ), I’m perplexed. It has to be more than that, no?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
If that report is correct, then two things come to mind:

1. The FIA is actually doing the right thing, for once. They are making it clear that there is a fixed cap and that teams should be very careful in their budgeting to leave space in case there are disputed items,

2. That Zac Brown may be ( should be ) in trouble. Two weeks ago, Christian Horner said people should wait until the facts are out and hinted at law suits. At the time, I thought it was just some typical Horner spin. Now I’m not so sure.

Just this past weekend, Zac Brown suggested that the overspending team committed fraud. Later, after Horner’s response ( including how Red Bull staff have unfairly received threats and their children have been harrassed ), he said “I didn’t name a team”. Well, the FIA had already announced that only one team - Red Bull - exceeded the cost cap. Not a defence, Zac. Take note, Zac - in the civil comtext, British courts take allegations of fraud very seriously!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,544 Posts
Discussion Starter · #354 ·
Fernando Alonso's post-race penalty at the USGP has been rescinded, and he has been restored to P7
 
  • Like
Reactions: southernstar

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Yes, but the entire situation and the FIA’s rulings speak to their inability to fairly control and govern races. Sticklers for form over substance, they initially ruled against Alpine yesterday as under a strict interpretation of the rules, a team cannot protest a ruling of the race stewards. However, what led to Alonso’s penalty was a protest by Haas of the stewards initial in-race decision not to flag Alonso for an unsafe car. Furthermore, Haas protest was brought too late under the same rules and should never have been allowed to be filed., let alone acted upon. These inconsistencies were not addressed in the ruling.

What is more, there was no analysis of the inconsistencies by the FIA between the stewards on track rulings, the post race determination that the car was safe, the lack of penalties post race to other drivers/cars with broken front wings ( including one where the endplate flew off on track ). Simply put, race results must now be considered unofficial, even after post race car inspections, until the race director and FIA bureaucrats deal with any protests over the steward’s on track rulings that are filed within 30 minutes of the end of the race! What is more, the race director’s in-race rulings concerning the deployment of flags is essentially meaningless as he can, as here, overrule himself ex post facto!

If the race director believes, as here, that his own and the stewards in-race decision was wrong, they should receive a reprimand or penalty rather than the team who complied with it. Rather than conducting a hearing concerning Alonso and Alpine’s conduct, one should now be directed at their own actions. Fat chance of that!
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
Yep, the FIA fail at ensuring the teams adhere to the car design rules and they can't even run a race properly.

Huge amounts of money involved, you would think they would have the best of the best people.

If I was a team manager I'd be making lots of noise about them. Look at 2021, millions spent for the WDC to be treated like a joke
Pete
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
I don‘t understand how, at any point after a race, a team is allowed to protest the in-race decisions of the race stewards and the race director with a view to affecting the results of the race. Does any other sport allow a team or competitor to protest calls by the on field/track officials after the event?

In addition, does any other sport allow officials to put off calls that can affect the results until after the race or event, as F1 seems to be doing with increasing regularity? Why can’t they make decisions concerning responsibility and penalties for all accidents, alleged safety car infringements, etc. during the race?

Does anyone actually prefer the results to be determined after the fact by non-racers in a committee room? I think F1 should create a new series of T-shirts with appropriate captions. Herewith a couple of suggestions:

Formula 1
Who won ?
Who knows?

Formula 1
It ain’t over til the race director sings!

Any other suggestions?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Great comparison, sadly, as too many sailing races also end up decided in the protest room.…

On another note, Alfa Romeo is ending its association with Sauber and F1 after next season and Audi is taking up the mantle ( and providing engines ) starting in 2016. With the incredible rise in popularity of F1 in the USA, I wonder if it is a premature move from a marketing standpoint. Or perhaps it is indicative, yet again, of their lack of interest in the North American market.
 
341 - 360 of 407 Posts
Top