The vast, vast, vast majority of those complaining aren't ''normal'' fans. It's Lewis Hamilton fans. The FIA said it themselves, 48.13 trumps 48.12. There is a LOT of rules in the rulebook, and few people understand them. Hell, even people that work within F1 have to look at it constantly. Just because the majority of people do no understand what happened, doesn't mean that rules where broken. Trash newspapers in the UK are still going with the "FIA Robbed Lewis" playbook. Repeat things enough times and it becomes fact. That sorta thing.
Jeff it appears as though you are convinced that Masi acted within the rules. This seems to be from a very narrow interpretation of the various sub-sections in which you continue to argue that Masi does indeed have the power to over-ride anyone else. I feel that from a purely legal perspective Masi was incorrect and did not operate within the rules in order to make the decision. That is to say that in a court of law he would be found to be erroneous in his application of the regulations. For a moment let's assume I am wrong and that every decision Masi took was 'technically' allowed. Even if Masi had the power to selectively choose which cars should un-lap themselves and had the power to pull the pace car in a lap early, there was no exceptional circumstance happening that would require him to use this power. If we look at Grosjean's accident last year, that is an example of an exceptional circumstance where you can just about throw the rule book out the window with the aim of ensuring the safety of the driver. The situation that took place in the last few laps at Abu Dhabi were in no way exceptional or strange. There was nothing about that situation that warranted a special application of the rules. No driver was in danger and nothing new or special was happening. There was plenty of precedent to support several courses of action by Masi none of which could be argued by anyone as being a rogue interpretation of the rules. Even without a technical understanding of the rules the basic understanding of sport is that all the competitors will be treated equally by the regulations and by those individuals applying the regulations. As it was 5 drivers were treated in one fashion (were allowed to un-lap themselves) and 3 were not. That by it's very definition is an inequitable application of the regulations. It is so incredibly simple that I can't believe it is a point of discussion.
... and yet, YOU keep posting in this thread ... repeating the same old nonsense ... the race was unfair, the race was a farce .... on and on But you continue to think that i'm the only one still arguing? Sad, very very sad Do you even realize that the same old crap ... "masi broke the rules, the race was unfair" ... actually convinces no one, who has actually bothered to read the rules? No matter ... you are quite welcome, to this leave this thread instead of desperately trying to defend the un-defendable, page after page after page ...
The exceptional circumstance IMO was the desire (by all teams) to finish under green, especially a title deciding race would've been anti-climatic if it finished under SC.
A fair post! Certainly worthy of response A few clarifications, first: - I am far, FAR from alone, in my understanding that Masi acted well within his authority. The stewards agree (on the "letter" of the rules), and Shovlin (speaking for Mercedes on the "spirit" of the rules) agrees as well. Many other posters on internet message boards, too ... fwiw. Hamilton fans, by and large, are the ones screaming the loudest ... that's no coincidence. - Masi doesn't have the authority to "over-ride anyone else", but he does have "over-riding authority on the use of the safety car" (with no reference to, or qualifiers of, "in accordance with the Sporting Regs", by the way). These aren't my words, they are written in 15.3. It serves no one's argument, to pretend that this rule doesn't exist ... especially when the stewards recognize its supremacy. - Legally, this argument wouldn't even make it to court! The written, and well-recognized "hierarchy" of 15.3>48.13>48.12 would lead to a quick dismissal, on "legal" grounds. HOWEVER, i do agree that there were no "safety" concerns, either way, driving Masi's decision. Instead, I suspect that Masi was motivated by two (2) things, in exercising his authority late in Abu Dhabi: 1. The pre-race agreement to end the race under green if at all possible (the existence of this agreement is explicitly recognized by the stewards, and refuted by no one). 2. The "spirit" of the unlapping rule ... namely, to get "the majority" of the field on the same lap, and to "bunch up the field" so that drivers on "fresh rubber" can challenge drivers on "old tyres" for "exciting racing" (direct quotes from Shovlin). I think it's worth understanding why Mercedes believes that it's only necessary to get "the majority" of the field on the same lap. An extreme example will illustrate the point: A safety car is called-out late in a race, where a back-marker has already been lapped 3 times. The Race Director can end under green, or choose to wait several more laps under the safety car while that back-marker unlaps fully ... maybe risking a yellow finish, long LONG after it's been safe to resume racing. Does the Director have the "authority" to make the call? I say YES, he does. The stewards would agree with me, certainly, as would Shovlin (speaking for Mercedes). But wait ... isn't that back-marker, already lapped 3 times ... being treated "unfairly"?? Why would Mercedes advocate such a thing?
Try to explain us how Hamilton supporters are not "normal". Also why do you judge people who denounce the course of event at Abu Dhabi as less educated than you, who "understand" everything ? Finally, why is the British press trash for not agreeing with you? I think you show your bias just as much as the people you accuse of not being impartial. You and your sidekick Werewolf are upset because some F1 fans dare to challenge what happened at Abu Dhabi (among other things) and expect some scrutiny from the FIA enquiry to avoid a similar situation in future. What happened isn't the sort of thing you can swipe under the carpet , as much as you would like it to be. So, please, don't treat us as inferior second class F1 enthusiasts, or "fanboys" as some put it.
Jeff I wish I had the time to have a battle of wits with you, not that I'd need to bring my A game so to speak but unfortunately I really havent got the time or inclination mate, so please carry on repeating youself, I'am however envious that you seem to have sooooo much time too waste
Bye Bye We've never seen anything even remotely resembling an "A Game" from you (certainly not in this debate) ... but maybe another day, in another thread? I'll keep an eye out Hope springs eternal
Ok Bas I know we made some headway with finding some middle ground with this, however I do not think it is a good idea to fight other folks battles. I'am not saying I totally disagree with your points on above though, but I think you get my gist.
I never said Hamilton fans aren't normal. Perhaps neutral was a better word to in my example. I never said those who didn't understand it are less educated, William. In fact, to make sure such misunderstandings weren't made, I made sure to write that even people that work inside F1 frequently have to check the rule book. But apparently, that went straight over your head (not a big surprise, I guess). British press isn't trash for disagreeing with me. I specifically wrote ''trash british press''. As in, the trashy newspapers that aren't factual at all, just jump on anything they can for a cheap headline. I don't care for your other interpretation. PS I never treated you as a second class F1 enthusiast. I do however point out you being wrong. Not my fault that happens so often.
The main point with all this is that the rules weren't written as clearly as (anyone) would like. I'm sure by the start of the next season certain rules will be clarified further, i.e. clearly written that .13 trumps .12 (or not, if they decide it won't from now on), and in more detail what the race director is and isn't allowed to do, and up to what point. Perhaps even the words ANY, ALL and MAY will be clarified further. Masi made a decision that required for 99.8% of F1 fans to dig out the rule book and see exactly what was written. IMO the unorthodox way it happened is what fueled the fire. No one cares that some back markers remained back markers, or that some drivers couldn't move from 7th to 6th. The loud noise is made because Lewis didn't win. If it was a completely standard unlapping procedure (which is still a decision that's made by clerk of the course and/or the race director), the same people that are pissed off now would still be pissed off, and would still claim that Max was helped by the FIA because the FIA didn't "have" to unlap anyone, as it doesn't always happen. Masi was never going to win with whatever decision he made. Unlap? Wrath of Lewis fans. No unlapping? Wrath of Max fans. He went halfway with some cars unlapping, which in the end didn't change the outcome if he unlapped or unlapped some. I keep going back to the same points, that Lewis received help twice earlier in the race, and that Toto got his wish once if not twice (I don't know how much he was influencing the lap 1 track cut, but certainly the 1st VSC), and Horner got the other. I also keep going back to the point that Mercedes received an awful lot of help this season to remain in the fight, and that Max was the correct winner of the title. I know it's got F all to do with the last lap decision, but considering it's Hamilton fans that keep going on about it, the motive has to be considered. I said it right after the race, and I'll say it again: Hamilton was robbed of a race win, but not of a title. He drove a great race and lost it all at the end, through no fault of his own. Mercedes failed to pit him when they had the gap, Before the unlapping, the Mercedes radio was very telling, as normally cars do unlap in situations like this and they had just blown their chance of pitting. Lewis tried the SC to increase his speed (going round the track quicker so there's less time to clean up, higher chance of finishing under SC), Toto tried to get the race to finish under SC and stop the unlapping, and Horner tried the opposite. I'm annoyed because for the entire season, no one cared about the thigns that the FIA and Masi where doing. It was all good fun. Even before the last lap, no one cared. Until the last lap and Masi is the anti christ. I'm annoyed because the vast majority making the noise are doing their best to de-legitimize Max's championship. If I/we stay silent, they'll take that silence as if they're right. With the way the rules are written, Masi acted within the rules. Unorthodox, for sure, but within the rules. I'm sure they'll be clarified/amended further. My gripe isn't with you, it's specifically with those that call Max a fake champion.
Wonderful post ! I'm open to a "truce", or "cease fire" agreement, at least ... if you'll agree to moderate
If some people want to "de-legitimize Max' championship", don't count me as one of them ! Five minutes after the chequered flag and during the podium ceremony, I had already overcome my anger and accepted that the title was his. Verstappen isn't a fake champion; he drove the best he could and had no part in what happened. My beef has never been with Verstappen, but with Masi, and I question the grey areas in the rulebook that allow one man to overturn a race so spectacilarly.
Why were these rules followed so consisitantly in years past if they were so unclear? You say Hamilton was robbed a win but not the title. This doesn't make sense as this race win is directly tied to whether he wins the title or not.
