My votes for the most reasonable posters in this thread, presenting well-considered and well-articulated perspectives (alphabetically) : Bas, Kimi2007, and Nuvolari ... with honorable mention to ingegnere No, all of my votes are not on the same "side"
I don't understand how NOT broadcasting race director communications "protects" the race director from any pressure...it's not like fans/tv outlets have been able to communicate back in real-time with the race director and pressure him into something silly. All this translates to me is "lets make the process as opaque as possible, so there won't be any scrutiny of ongoing/future shady back channel talks that might expose our incompetence and/or corruption."
It's not what I understood. From what I read, team principals will NOT be able to contact directly the race director during a GP. Communications will be relayed to him to avoid the director to be under pressure when he is making decisions.
Reassigning Masi makes sense, because this version of the RD role was made after Charlie Whiting’s passing, and there was intention around giving teams more access to the Race Director. Outright firing him would not have been correct as Liberty chose to depart from the former role. I do agree that the change is due to consistency issues throughout the season, versus just the final act.
There is a very good reason why you don't broadcast communications at race control where inner debates are taking place before a final decision is reached, or the communications between the race director and teams is going on. Doing so turns the sport into a complete circus. Mosley didn't allow broadcasts to go out, or grant many appeals for exactly this reason. During the race stewards have to make a real time ruling or whether they'll do something or not do something in each given situation. Each team is going to scream at the director that their view is right, and that it would be the most unfair thing ever if the official ruling goes against them. When the broadcasts of each team lobbying go out, it inevitably gives the appearance that one teams lobbying succeeded and the other has been victimized. It also undermines the authority of whatever final decision was reached (be it right or wrong) in the internal debate being broadcasted. No different than two parents disagreeing about how, when, or if a child should be punished is overheard by all the children. Toto's "NO, MICHAEL NO! THIS IS SO NOT RIGHT!" as Max was overtaking Hamilton, couldn't have been more horribly timed, and greatly influenced viewer and media perception that something horribly unfair and corrupt was taking place. Notice Indycar, NASCAR, IMSA, ACO don't allow their race control communications to be broadcasted? They fear the scenario that played out at Abu Dhabi, and rightly so.
This is a recent article, I am simply posting to share. Make of it what you will. Michael Masi’s sacking is an admission that Lewis Hamilton was robbed of the F1 world title in Abu Dhabi Kevin Garside - 7h ago React3 Comments| Image Unavailable, Please Login It might not make Lewis Hamilton feel any better, it won’t give him back the championship ripped so unjustly from his grasp, but the removal of Michael Masi from the post of Formula One race director vindicates the anger and dismay felt by Hamilton, his Mercedes team and many others in the sport over the the season finale in Abu Dhabi. The decision to restructure the refereeing and adjudication of grands prix, which will see the job of race director shared by two officials and Masi shunted into a yet unspecified post within the FIA, is effectively an admission that an appalling injustice was perpetrated over the final five laps under the safety car when the rules as written were ignored to Hamilton’s detriment and Max Verstappen’s advantage. None would dispute that Verstappen proved himself over the season to be a worthy and deserving champion, only that Hamilton did too and since he was the driver who had the final race and championship in his pocket until Nicholas Lafiti’s fateful crash changed the course of history, the title did not confer on Verstappen the majesty it would have had he won conventionally. The removal of Masi was one of a number of revisions proposed by new FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem that met the requirement for change demanded by Mercedes in the wake of the Abu Dhabi result. After an unsuccessful appeal on the day Mercedes decided against a second appeal in exchange for guarantees that a serious account of events would be taken and a new system introduced ahead of the new season. The new race directors, Niels Wittich and Eduardo Freitas, will act alternately with the support of a permanent assistant, Herbie Blash, a veteran of the Bernie Ecclestone era, as well as a remote VAR system that will help adjudicate in real time. The truth is it was not failings in the old structure that let Hamilton down and rewarded Verstappen, but the arbitrary over-riding of convention by one man. The rules that would have delivered an eighth title to Hamilton were in place. They just weren’t followed. In that sense there is a feeling that the new measures fall into the category of cosmetic surgery, making the FIA look better as the organisation tries desperately to claw back credibility. The appearance of a new president advancing on 2022 with a new broom creates the impression of a leadership exercising authority and control. Quite what Hamilton makes of it all will be discovered soon enough. The timing of the announcement offers Hamilton an opportunity to address the changes at Friday’s Mercedes launch, the first time he will have spoken publicly since congratulating Verstappen in Abu Dhabi immediately after the race. His silence was part of a strategic move by Mercedes to get some redress for the wrongs inflicted upon them. Since the FIA was the sanctioning body that dismissed their first appeal and would have heard their second, the judged correctly that the Abu Dhabi outcome was beyond changing. The best for which they could hope was Masi’s exit and the quasi acknowledgement that the regulators had failed them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With some type of closure for 2021, let's hope 2022 is exciting for its racing and not its officiating. Regards, Jerry
Sacking Masi is the chicken way out of a difficult situation. Fair is for the FIA to evaluate if he made severe judgment errors against the set of rules that were in place during the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix. If not, there are NO grounds for sacking him. Now the rules themselves are a completely separate discussion. I think we all agree that the events on December 12th showed that these rules were far from perfect and needed modifications. Nothing new really, this happens all the time: rules are made with the best intentions and then found lacking in real life. But you can not blame the guy policing those rules for the imperfections. Fair is to admit that the old rules were ambiguous and led to an unwanted situation, the next step is to implement corrections to the rules to prevent the unwanted situation. But in doing that, FIA would admit that their rules were to blame and not Masi.....
^^^ whichever way you look at it, whether it’s rules or Massi, it’s all FIA…. I expect rules will get reviewed as well with time.
The radio messages are not broadcast in real time you know? The TV output is controlled by Liberty's TV company, so if they actively chose to do this, one can only assume that they felt it would add to 'The Show'. So far the changes are just moving deckchairs on the Titanic: Massi had to go but 2 replacements will just give room for different interpretations of the rules race-to-race. And there is no clean-up on the rules themselves, which are patently unfair to the drivers who have built leads when a safety car is deployed (and before you squeak, HAM has unfairly benefited from them in the past). The only good thing I have read is that the new cars are much less forgiving of bumps and kerbs, so I'm hoping we get a more natural inclination to race on the track rather than off it. I hate the 'track limits exceeded' thing. I also hate VAR in football. I thought it would be a good thing, but the way it's being used is not improving decisions and is making the game more difficult to watch. Not really a good precedent for introducing it in F1.
Agreed. The positive thing is the replacements are highly respected FIA figures. RE the track exceeded thing, fully agreed there as well, which is why the new changes to Spa for instance are so baffling to me....if they go through all the trouble of adding gravel again, at least do it up to the line so that when track limits are exceeded, we know, because they'll hit the f'in gravel...and the driver knows, because he's going a lot damn slower suddenly!
I make that the person who wrote it didn't watch the f.1 season, and so shouldn't write about something he doesn't understand, because it makes him look as an ignorant.
Possible, but not everything was glaringly obvious at the time. It's only when you analyse the conversations that you measure how much Masi was influenced. Very poor leadership skills, IMO. A race director is there to give instructions, not to receive them. At Abu Dhabi he signed his own" death warrant", and I am glad he is out !!!
They should introduce FANBOOST from FE, the results of the fanboost decide the winner of the race instead of what actually happened.
You won't be when you find out the new race director isn't turning a blind eye to every rule breaking elton does....one of them at least isn't in his pocket!
Believe it when I see it. Britain drivers have always gotten to bend rules that drivers of other nationalities are given zero tolerance on. It doesn't seem to matter who's in the booth for this to be the case. Track limits, collisions, flags, pitlane entry/exit lines particularly. Alonso was the first driver to call out the special treatment they get that I can remember, and it was refreshing.
