Ok so I take it seems you couldn't care less who won as long as Hamilton was beaten, fair enough. So instead of discussing constructive point's raised in which the manner of the final race ended, you prefer to read, or as in your words, you enjoy reading/watching Ham fans tearing their hair out, and I have no doubt you contribute to fan the flames of that, well thanks for your honesty, it explains alot. However that's where we differ, because I gleaned no enjoyment whatsoever from the total cock-up of the final race as it unfolded, and it appears I'am not alone with that sentiment, it's not because Hamilton lost, it was just simply the adhoc and confusing way the rules were applied. I can sympathize with Max's fans, it is not right that they feel the need to vigorously defend and justify his win, the thing is they don't have to, for Max and for that matter Lewis are or could have been worthy winners, the problem or subject matter is on the way Masi applied the rules. I know alot of casual/occasional watchers of F1,<(not fans of either Max or Lewis) and I know alot were just totally dumbfounded in what occured, I figure most folk are avid fans that post on here, and most would have a task in explaining the rulings in what went down in the final race, even if they do, you could argue its not exactly the best way to attract new customers to the sport. BTW I have nothing to get over as in get over myself!?, I see no need for that rather odd remark, afterall it is only my point of view that differs from yours, I also have no idea why my post ended up in bold, I apoligise if you think otherwise, and I had a ulterior motive, it is not the case.
Bas, you try to lend credence to the unlapping decision because you think that Mercedes powered rivals would hold up Verstappen. Your problem with this, per your assertion above, is that it would be a net gain for Lewis, and to you, that would not be very sporting. So what? If that is the case, is that not racing? When Perez held up Lewis by literally parking it on the apex, he was praised, endlessly. When Alonso held up Lewis by driving a masterclass defense, he was praised, endlessly. Alsonso proudly proclaimed after the race to Max that he did the best he could to hold up Hamilton. What then, is the exact difference from your proposed scenario above? Are you arguing that following the original call by Masi, Hamilton would have won? Are you arguing that a separate set of rules should be applied to Hamilton & Mercedes? Are you arguing that the reason for the unorthodox unlapping procedure was to protect Max from being held up by rivals? Please clarify your position. You can't have it both ways. If you are ok with a driver from the same or different teams holding up another driver in a sporting pretense, you have to be ok with the same happening to your preferred driver / team. That is, if you want racing, and not a show. Because that's what this is all about, remember? I want fair racing. Not a show. What do you want? Why? Why would the FIA, being a governing body, care at all what the fans think, in this scenario? Are you arguing that the FIA should bow to fans to put on a show? Are you arguing that a regulatory body should be feeling pressure from external forces at all? Please clarify your position on this.
Well your 2 examples, that was for position. This would be to unlap oneself. Nope, we don't know who would've won. No No I'm not arguing for that, either. The argument is that there was perhaps a lack of time to let ALL cars through. Masi let enough cars through to clean the field up as much as he could before going green. Unlapping isn't new to F1. Had all cars passed Lewis and Max would still be in an identical situation. Well I wouldn't call those guys rivals of Max, I'd more call them fairly strongly associated by Mercedes, npne of them in prestigious enough positions to NOT hold up Max. I am ok with it, because, again, the 2 instances you mentioned, it was for position. And the race previous, as soon as the SC flag was out, Bottas held up Max massively on the run up to the pit (it being a SC situation, Max wasn't allowed to pass), by such an amount that Max was pushed back deeply into the pack, preventing him from pitting. That wasn't even looked at! So spare me the outrage of a driver racing another for position on a green track. You ***** about it not being fair, but if all cars where unlap, Max would still have taken Lewis. Would you still cry about Masi letting drivers unlap? My stance on the FIA has been clear for most of the year, when they artificially started to slow down Red Bull in order to give a closer title fight. Didn't hear you then, did we...
You keep on reiterating that unlapping is normal. Of course it is, literally no one is arguing that it isn't. We are talking about the method used. There is a regulation that all lapped cars must pass (per Masi, per actual regulation) with the safety car ending on the following lap. If that rule was followed correctly, the race would have ended under safety car. Lewis Wins. Since there is a prior general agreement to not end races under the safety car, there really was only one legal option for Masi to do, and he initially did: No cars to unlap, bring safety car in to have a lap of green flag racing. If you want a lap of green flag racing LEGALLY, cars would NOT BE UNLAPPED. Masi made the freaking correct call the first time. Horner then makes a call and suddenly two rules are broken: Safety car ends immediately, and the now infamous only lapped cars between Hamilton and Verstappen allowed to pass. Sainz can't push for the win, becuase he's not part of the race, correct? Again, why was that call made? Was it for: Entertainment Or Fair and Sporting Regulation, as per the rules. Pick One. Just answer the question.
Obviously it was for entertainment and Liberty Media. But since all he cares about is his guy Max won, he continually avoids the truth of why/what Masi did was wrong, and against fair contests/sport.
Why did Masi allow Hamilton to cut the course in Abu Dhabi without penalty, when just one race before Max was penalized for an identical exceeding of track limits? Blatant case of "track limits apply to everyone but Hamilton" ruling from the stewards. Why did the FIA give Hamilton a slap on the wrist 10 second penalty in Silverstone, when precedent was 30 seconds, like with Kimi vs Vettel? Why did the FIA ignore evidence the Mercedes rear wing was illegally designed to flex, and likely responsible for Hamilton's sudden, dramatic straight line advantage in the last 4 races? Answer: entertainment. They wanted the British public to remain interested in the title. It's F1. In racing, entertainment value and politics have always played a huge factor in officiating. This is hardly the worst case of it. Not even close. McLaren drivers being allowed to continue to race despite the team having been caught defrauding Ferrari, so the WDC fight didn't come to a sudden end rings a bell. One could go on. IMHO, it was not lost on the Masi and the other stewards that letting Hamilton once again cut the track and gain a huge advantage without penalty, fanned the flames of accusations they were out to hand a British driver a record breaking 8th title, and that the race finishing under yellow, or with lapped cars protecting Hamilton would confirm that theory. So, he evened it out, and bent a rule for RBR like he had done for Mercedes earlier to try and help wash himself of such accusations, and left Hamilton to fend for himself for one measly lap. That's what I firmly believe happened.
Again, we go back to the pact the all teams and the FIA made together, it was preferable to finish under green conditions. And so they did. Horner makes a call to Masi and Masi says ok cool, cars are allowed to unlap. Wolff made a call to Masi so that there won't be a SC despite 2 stranded cars on track, because Max already pitted and Lewis would lose track position. They both meddled, they both benefitted. Stop your whinging, Max is a legit champion, Lewis lost. Get over it. No amount of Bold, Underline or italic fonts will change any of it. You lot found it all fine when, in the name of entertainment (apparently), Red Bull was artificially slowed down so that Red Bull wouldn't win with X races to go.
Why didn't you answer the question? Why you keep bringing up past scenarios? Why you keep saying Max is champion? We know that. That was not the only option to finish under green. There were multiple options to finish under green. Masi chose to break the rules. We accept that Max is champion. But you don't want to accept it was because Masi broke the rules.
Masi is the race director. He interpreted article 15.3 as giving him overriding discretion, and the stewards agreed he indeed had the authority to not fully apply 48.12 at his discretion. Mercedes dropped their appeal because they knew damn well the FIA ICA were going to sustain Masi's authority in this matter. You may not interpret the rules the same way because your driver lost, but it doesn't matter. The stewards have made their ruling, and denied Mercedes protest, explaining their interpretation and application of the rules. Their ruling is finale, and should not be subject to intimidation and public pressure campaigns because one man, one team, and his supporters and allies are not emotionally over it yet. This has honestly gotten pathetic to watch. Hamilton is disgracing himself, and showing that one of his biggest flaws is having a victimhood complex that is toxic to F1 culture.
Thanks for admitting it. I am now satisfied. As a final aside, I personally never was perturbed about Max winning. He can keep his championship. The constant gaslighting by Sky and other F1 connected pundits is what drove me up the wall. Just tell the truth, and move on. Don’t try to justify it with nonsense. Going forward, let’s learn from this so it doesn’t happen again. The race director role needs a massive overhaul, and teams bargaining with officials needs to be placed in the bin.
Masi needs a deputy director. Hell, if even the great Charlie Whiting had one in his final years (masi), and his untimely death prompting the unplanned promotion, the least FIA could've done is immediately give Masi a sidekick. Firing Masi won't be the correct way forward, unless they can get the race director from Le Mans/WEC. Masi's biggest problem is that he's simply not respected. When Whiting spoke, everyone listened. The likes of Toto and Horner wouldn't try and order him around.
Totally agree. The situation of the last championship is completely unusual. Masi is a man above everything else. Truth is Latifi crash surprised everyone. Even Mercedes failed big time with its strategy the last five laps..
Look at 48.12, you will find the safety car rules. But Masi himself along with past stewards agreed this 48.12 rule should be honored in the past. In the history of F1 you will see this 48.12 rule upheld. 15.3 gives Masi the right to break this rule. He did. FIA will not admit to this fault of Masi, that's no surprise. Asking the FIA to admit fault is laughable. It doesn't matter who won or lost. What matters is the rules not being honored.
In terms of rules there is always an adaptation according to the circumstances. In law (at least in France ) this feeds what is called jurisprudence. Without this jurisprudence no civilized society could function normally because the law stricto sensu need to be ponderate in most cases. Can you understand that?
Yeah I understand that. Now if you don't mind, lets get back to F1 rules. Masi had multiple options other than breaking the rules, he failed.
Given the pressure Mercedes is currently putting on the FIA, I can’t see Masi staying in his current role. If he avoids being fired, he will surely get demoted in some way.
… he says, like it’s perfectly ok for one butt-hurt competitor to dictate to the sanctioning body who they should or shouldn’t employ. You guys have totally lost the plot. With the way the “sporting” Mercedes organization disgraced themselves first in the DTM final race and then by not showing up to the FIA ceremony, maybe THEY should be worried about being reprimanded. Hopefully the new guy has the gumption to do so.
This is exactly the point. Mercedes political power is so huge and everyone is fine with this ! Toto calling Masi during the race and saying no SC no SC !! Is an absolute disgrace for FIA. Hope things will change soon ..
What part of "The race director shall have OVERRIDING AUTHORITY in the following matters: e)Use of safety car" in 15:3 are you not understanding? It's right there in black and white that Masi has the right to do what he did. You think he didn't know the rules better than you? The stewards upheld his authority to do what he did, and the ICA would do the same, and that is why Mercedes dropped their appeal. They know they're wrong. It's over. It's done. Masi made his decision, which was clearly outlined as within his authority and discretion to do in the sporting regulations. It should be final, and not subject to social media pressure campaigns, because one driver and team can't emotionally handle that the title slipped away at the end. Move on. This has gotten pitiful.
