"Some people don't attend the Nobel Prize or the Oscar giving ceremonies, even when they are recipients." Indeed, because they might be in jail, and anyhow they will receive their Cheque / Oscar in the mail, regardless. A bientôt, Alberto
Don, you are right. But I was more inclined towards: Liu Xiaobo, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, of course jailed. I do not think his award was sent to China. Weinstein is a lowdown dregs of the invertebrate sector alongside Epstein, whom unfortunately, at least had the decency / cowardice to off himself . Regards, Alberto
I thought Harvey Weinstein was the one giving work ... Several recipients of Oscars didn't turn to receive them at the awards ceremony. Just wondering if the studios sanctionned them.
Who could forget the Russian poet Boris Pasternak, those "Dr Zhivago" masterpiece manuscript was smuggled to the West ? He was living under house arrest at the time, and prevented by the Soviets to collect his Nobel Litterature Prize.
Right, it was the scratch that disqualified them..not the thing that caused the scratch. Can you explain how Mm and the decimal system work again? ;-) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another guy that keeps avoiding the main question. Let's try this one more time. Don't bother with the cute "what caused the scratch" I'm all for enforcing the rules and I didn't argue that the wing did not breach the rules. The question again: if the system/rules are so strict for punish 0.2mm with a disqualification how did redbull get away with multiple repairs and duct tape without a single penalty?
You are the one who said it “was a scratch on the paint” but gay was the problem. That is simply false. Ask someone else your other question. My guess is that repairs are treated differently than engineered I repaired rule violations..but that is a wild guess. You have access to the rule book. Look it up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apologies for the typos… You are the one who said it “was a scratch on the paint” that was the problem. That is simply false. Ask someone else your other question. My guess is that repairs are treated differently than engineered solutions for rule violations..but that is a wild guess. You have access to the rule book. Look it up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you’re trying to prove anything other than you (and similarly uninformed co-conspirator @william) understand nothing of the geometry and functioning of a rear wing and how the inspection in question is used to control the DRS gap, keep writing this nonsense and quoting Dodo’s completely irrelevant 0.2 mm comment. The quick answer to your obviously unreasoned query is this: the tape repair carried out by RBR was on the the pressure side (top) of the flap and so in no way affected the DRS gap opening which is the inspection that Merc failed. The other repair done to the mainplane was far forward of the flap so again would not have reduced the DRS gap as inspected. Now if your cognitive dissonance allows you to actually read and learn something, you may want to read what I wrote already about the inspection process. This was very well explained—even demonstrated—by Ted Kravitz of Sky about how the failed inspection was failed not by .2 mm but by having zero resistance of the inspection gauge. The added resistance requirement points to the fact that the go/no-go gauge is expected to be “forced” through to a certain extent—so teams should err on a tighter gap. Even the Sky muppets concluded this was a slam dunk DQ. The fact that the gauge slid through on the Merc means they left themselves no margin and in fact, exceeded the margin. The .2 mm comment in light of this is pure BS as this test is not an absolute measurement.
In other words rules are rules but we will follow them at our discretion....we will also make up new ones on the last lap to change the outcome of the championships. Btw, nobody here is talking about how paddy power paid out bets for Lewis Hamilton to win the championship. “We at Paddy Power hate sporting injustices–so we’ve done our bit after a controversial end to the F1 season in Abu Dhabi. Max Verstappen needed a miracle to win, and one duly arrived in the form of a dodgy decision from the race organizers who appeared to rip up the rulebook and go rogue for the final lap of the race.” But hey don't let that stop you from trying to justifying what Masi did was correct and that there was nothing abnormal about the last lap. Carry on with your nonsense excuses
This is really becoming dull. Boring. I am quitting this thread. I am certain no one will miss me. OK, so everyone is right and everyone is wrong. That should be a happy ending. Even ben73 ought be happy, even though I am doubtful. At least he got rid of that dreary "Maxipad" moniker, bad taste and silly. Maybe he wants another BAN? Thought he'd be gone after that that, but nooooo. Silly me. Nothing else in life? Then get one, please. Regards, Alberto
Shame that you took time to write a cogent and informative explanation only to have it be ignored with a straw man planted in front of it.
LOL let me get this straight people who had to pay out money because Elton lost are angry he lost? Ok.
I don't think you're following. Who said anything about paddy power writing rules? Let me get this straight I should go by the opinion of the armchair experts on fchat that all was fine on the last lap and ignore the people that are in the business of making millions by analyzing all sports. Is that your suggestion?
If it makes you happier you can follow the actions of Mercedes F1 that dropped their own case because they don't have a single leg to stand on. Doesn't matter to me which approach you take.
