Renault finally protests Racing Point

probably not...but the brake duct is a very complicated part that you can't simply copy using some photos....so I think why that part was protested is that it's basically proof that the car was build with Mercedes IP, instead of ''inspired by'' (something that RP claimed).

 

They didn’t need to photograph the ducts RP purchased the brake ducts intellectual property in 2019 and Mercedes supplied them. Are you supposed to redesign a part you already own? If the Mercedes duct had changed in 2020 and RP used the new design I could understand being sanctioned, but using a part you already possess the rights to because you bought it previously makes no sense.


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

That's my argument.

How can something you buy legally in 2019, becomes illegal a year later ?

The FIA rule that says that is an ass!

 

https://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/29660624/renault-calls-racing-point-disqualified-races

Renault has protested Racing Point at every race since then, with a panel of FIA stewards finally declaring last weekend that the rear brake ducts were in breach of F1's sporting regulations.

The decision, which treated all the individual protests as one, saw Racing Point docked 15 points and fined €400,000, but also allowed the team to continue to use the brake ducts for the rest of the season with nothing more than a reprimand at each race.

That verdict has been appealed by both Racing Point -- on the basis that the team has done nothing wrong -- and Ferrari and Renault, who are seeking clarity on the issue and calling for the punishment to go further.

Chief among Renault's complaints is that it saw its cars disqualified from last year's Japanese Grand Prix over a brake-bias system that was found to have broken the sporting regulations. On the basis that it was disqualified in Japan and had to remove the system from the car, Renault is calling for the same penalty to be applied to Racing Point.

"We were expecting a consistent sanction with other sanctions that we've seen in the past, with the most recent one being the one we accepted last year after Suzuka when we were found in breach of a sporting regulation, not a technical regulation, and were excluded from that event, therefore losing all our points," Renault team principal Cyril Abiteboul said. "There was no discount for Renault so I don't know why there should be a discount for Racing Point, it should be all the points of the events that we've been protesting.

"I think we are also going to be in a bit of a strange situation where after every single event Otmar will be called to the stewards, his brake ducts will be found similar to what they were and he will again receive a reprimand. We are facing, what, 10 races where his cars will be reprimanded.

 

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-2021-design-copy-ban/4856139/

The FIA has promised that it will "expressly prevent" teams on the use of photography and other techniques to “reverse engineer” copies of the cars of rivals.
The formal commitment is a follow-up to comments made in an interview last weekend by FIA head of single-seater technical matters Nikolas Tombazis in the wake of the Racing Point brake duct case verdict, amid the ongoing wider controversy regarding the copying of an entire car.

Racing Point has made clear that it copied the overall aerodynamic concept of last year’s Mercedes W10 from photographs, a practice that hitherto has not been addressed by the rules that govern the listed parts that teams have to design themselves.

The FIA wants to ban both tacit cooperation between teams that have a business relationship and legitimately share other technology, as well as the direct stealing of ideas by rivals.

The governing body’s commitment was contained in a letter sent this week to the teams by Peter Bayer, the FIA’s secretary general for motorsport. The letter also outlined other future initiatives, such as the upcoming ban on special qualifying modes.

Bayer confirmed that the FIA intends to modify Article 22.3 of the 2021 technical regulations, which covers listed parts.

Because the deadline for changes to next year's technical regulations has passed, unanimity would usually be required – unless changes are mandated for safety reasons, as is the case with the cut in 2021 downforce levels that Bayer’s letter also promised.

However the letter made clear that with the new Concorde Agreement set to be signed any changes will now fall under the auspices of the revised governance structure, which requires only eight of the 10 teams to agree, via what will be known as a “super majority” of votes within the F1 Commission.

In a section headlined “Prohibition of extensive car copying from 2021 onwards,” Bayer made it clear that copying will be harder from now on.

He wrote: “We are in full agreement with many of you that it is not the direction that the sport wants to head towards. Additions to Article 22.3 of the 2021 technical regulations will expressly prevent teams from using photography or other reverse engineering techniques to copy large parts of other teams’ cars,” adding that “designs from the first race of the 2020 season may still form the legitimate basis for further evolution in 2021.”

Ferrari boss Mattia Binotto said today that he hoped that the International Court of Appeal hearing on the Racing Point brake duct case would provide further clarity.

“I think that eventually the decision of the International Court of Appeal will open to a wider and broader discussion on the carbon copy car concept,” he said. “Which for us is important, and is important as well for the future of F1.

“At the end it’s about discussing intellectual property, and I think that intellectual property is a very important asset of a company.

“If someone would somehow copy almost an identical car of the previous year of a competitor, I think the set of regulations should somehow protect the set of regulations itself, and that’s why I think at the moment it’s important to simply move forward and understand – clarity and transparency for the fairness of the competition and F1 in the future it’s important.”

McLaren team principal Andreas Seidl has welcomed the FIA’s initiative.

“The most important thing for us was a clear commitment and agreement from FIA and F1 that want to prohibit extensive copying in the future,” said the German. “We got this agreement with the announcement of Nikolas [Tombazis] last Friday in Silverstone, and with further information we received on Tuesday."

Mercedes boss Toto Wolff noted at Silverstone last weekend that copying is rife in the F1 pitlane.

“We saw it last year, on a few occasions,” he said. “One of our main competitors with a 3D camera that is quite a thing, you need to have it on your shoulders, scanning our cars, in the garage and outside of the garage. So scanning the whole car, and when you plug that into a computer, it gives you all the shapes.

“And so this technology exists. There is nothing that prohibits that. Everybody has spy photographers sitting on the roofs of the opposite building, we're zooming into the smallest detail on every car, and if we don't want this to happen then we need to close that avenue.”

 

Oh, ****. Now we´ll get that kind of protests about how many photos are too many photos and how similar is too much similar.

IMO, FIA should get both cars, look for differences between them and ask someone who knows if it´s possible to achieve that from pics. If they can proove that it wasn´t copied from pics then kick Stroll´s and Mercedes asses out of F1. If they can´t proove it (or just don´t want to, for understandable practical reasons), then let it go. If needed, they have the means to castrate Racing Point these two seasons to please Renault.

 

Clone Point set the state for this by protesting Renault last year and winning that brake system protest. The system was removed. Clone are using part that are not authorized yet can keep them. Do that math for Renault LOL. Love this political drama!!

 

If it was legal, and oh so simple....they wouldn't get fined for it! RP got the brake ducts 6th of january this year....so how can they already owned it?

the problem is with kicking them out, F1 hasn't exactly got teams knocking on the door begging for an entry. So all F1 will do is shoot themselves in the foot by reducing the teams from 10 to 8....

 

Ecclestone snaps at Stroll: "He should be happy that he got into F1 so easily"
https://www.gptoday.net/nl/nieuws/f1/257264/ecclestone-snauwt-naar-stroll-hij-mag-blij-zijn-dat-hij-zo-makkelijk-in-f1-kwam

The case over the legality of Racing Point's 2020 car will be disputed before the International Court of Appeal. Apparently, this saddens team owner Stroll so much that the team owner launched a real defensive offensive. Stroll is primarily concerned with its integrity.

“I don't often speak in public, but I am extremely angry at any suggestion that we have been underhand or cheated,” said Stroll.

"I've never cheated in my life. These allegations are completely unacceptable and untrue. My integrity - and that of my team - is beyond question." Stroll was also angry with the teams that continue the case, according to him his reputation is being "taken through the mud".

Dramatic
But Ecclestone thinks it is all too dramatic how Stroll is now acting.

"He doesn't have to be angry," Ecclestone told Auto Motor und Sport . "What happened is that Racing Point has stretched the rules a little too far. This is the result."

Ecclestone suggests that Stroll should be especially grateful for his place in F1.

"He should be happy that they let him into Formula 1 so easily two years ago," said Ecclestone.

"Humility Would Fit"
"Stroll was allowed to take that team out of bankruptcy while retaining all rights. If he had done business with me, he would have started all over again a year later with his new team name."

 

All thanks to Perez. He made the effort.

 

Don’t forget corrupt administrators...

https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/2752/force-india-administrators-face-legal-action-over-stroll-sale/

 

yes I do remember this!

 

Vijay M makes Stroll look like a choir boy .

 

Talk about stretching the rules, remember Bernie with Brabham.

Ecclestone is trying to be relevant by being controversial, does anyone really feel having Force India sitting out the rest of the season in 2018 when it came out receivership and laying off most of the team would have been better for F1. May have worked for billionaire Ecclestone but not for Force India/ Racing Point team members and their families.

Stroll saved Force India from a Russian Oligarch and porno king Rich Energy who later folded their F1 sponsorship anyway.

Now a historical great British name Aston Martin will bring more interest for viewers, hats off for that brilliant move for both Aston Martin, Racing Point...and to Stroll. Brilliant!

Give me a break, Stroll has made F1 interesting again by taking advantage of a gap in the rules, just like Bernie.

 

Well, that's the dilema for the FIA, isn't it?
Last year, the FIA didn't dare to exclude Ferrari for engine irregularities and prefered to deal with it behind closed door.
The FIA was afraid to legislate too harshly against the most historical team, in case Maranello would leave F1.

Now there is that brake duct issue, and the FIA is againt not doing its job.
If the Racing Point cars are illegal, they should disqualify the team, and also sanction Mercedes for selling/providing them with parts?
The FIA has to do something, but not to the extend of upsetting the leading contributor in F1 at the moment (8 Mercedes-powered cars on the grid next year).
Difficult choice in Place de la Concorde; they may be cutting the branch they are sitting on.

 

I think Bernie Ecclestone should go easy on Lawrence Stroll.
There are still people who remember how he managed to get into F1 himself.
If they were still alive, Jack Brabham and Ron Tauranac could have something to say about the way Bernie obtained the ownership of their team.

 

Geezus, when was that, in the last century?

 

1 - Perez was one of the creditors who could (and did) put FI into administration, not Stroll.
2 - Ecclestone saved and helped teams throughtout F1.
3 - The administrators were sued by the Mazepin's father because they accepted the lower offer from Stroll.
4 - Why the prejudice against a Russian oligarch? What about a fashion oligarch from Canada?
5 - Back then when Bernie, Murray, and Piquet took advantages of the gap in the rules, they did so with their own ingenuity! How you can compare that with an arrogant prick who splashes tons of money to buy Mercedes' drawings from last year???

 

1972

Those who live in a glass house shouln't throw stones !

 

Congrats to Racing Point to becoming 3rd in the WCC standings!

 

What, aren't they protested yet ?

Abiteboul must be slacking ...

Maybe it's the shock; none of his cars finished in the points I believe.

 

ROFL, sour loosers.

 

Chief among Renault's complaints is that it saw its cars disqualified from last year's Japanese Grand Prix over a brake-bias system that was found to have broken the sporting regulations. On the basis that it was disqualified in Japan and had to remove the system from the car, Renault is calling for the same penalty to be applied to Racing Point.

"We were expecting a consistent sanction with other sanctions that we've seen in the past, with the most recent one being the one we accepted last year after Suzuka when we were found in breach of a sporting regulation, not a technical regulation, and were excluded from that event, therefore losing all our points," Renault team principal Cyril Abiteboul said. "There was no discount for Renault so I don't know why there should be a discount for Racing Point, it should be all the points of the events that we've been protesting.

"I think we are also going to be in a bit of a strange situation where after every single event Otmar will be called to the stewards, his brake ducts will be found similar to what they were and he will again receive a reprimand. We are facing, what, 10 races where his cars will be reprimanded.