Formula 1 2021

[goldfritter]

To anyone that has more time and patience than me to go into the FIA rules.

Let's say it is determined that the race directors and stewards made an error with the restart at the end of the race. What would the outcome of that decision then be? For me the only "fair" thing would be to nullify the race result. I.e. none of the classification of that race should count toward the championship. Which means the final standings would be as they were at the end of Saudi - i.e. tied on points but Max wins WDC because of more race wins. And the standings for Merc vs Red Bull would not change at all.

Unless there is a rule that they must take the classification of the race at the time the "error" was committed... But that seems murky to me, too much of a grey area.

Either way I'd be shocked, even if it was determined that an error was made, if they took away Max's championship.

And yes, this will go down in history as one of the most controversial championship endings ever. But I think Lewis now has the impetus to fight even harder next year for his eighth. It would almost be more impressive, more "deserving" to see him secure the record starting the season as runner-up.

 

[medicnick83]

To anyone that has more time and patience than me to go into the FIA rules.

Let's say it is determined that the race directors and stewards made an error with the restart at the end of the race. What would the outcome of that decision then be? For me the only "fair" thing would be to nullify the race result. I.e. none of the classification of that race should count toward the championship. Which means the final standings would be as they were at the end of Saudi - i.e. tied on points but Max wins WDC because of more race wins. And the standings for Merc vs Red Bull would not change at all.

Unless there is a rule that they must take the classification of the race at the time the "error" was committed... But that seems murky to me, too much of a grey area.

Either way I'd be shocked, even if it was determined that an error was made, if they took away Max's championship.

And yes, this will go down in history as one of the most controversial championship endings ever. But I think Lewis now has the impetus to fight even harder next year for his eighth. It would almost be a more impressive, more "deserving" to see him secure the record starting the season as runner-up.

It won't happen. It would cause to much drama and put FIA and F1 in the worst possible Light.
But it's basically done that already.


Sent from my SM-A526B using Tapatalk

 

[baasgene]

It won't happen. It would cause to much drama and put FIA and F1 in the worst possible Light.
But it's basically done that already.


Sent from my SM-A526B using Tapatalk

The overall result will still increase viewership so overall nothing is truly lost, and fuck Toto anyway. There's no better ending than a controversial ending after all, people will come back in droves next year to see what Max and Lewis gets up to.

This is the best way it could've ended, the race director made the right call.

Merc should've changed tyres anyway when the safety car came in just for in case something like this could occur, they skipped 2 opportunities and they paid the price for it. They went all in and lost. Never count your chickens until they hatch.

It's not like Lewis was struggling to stay ahead, to gamble on tyres is risky. I mean apart from the crash he could've lost a tyre and then a get dnf, even if Pirelli said the tyres are good for 50 laps it's not something you should bargain on.

 

[Spookpis]

MSN

www.msn.com

Protest filed by Mercedes-AMG Petronas F1 Team against the Classification established at the end of the Competition Stewards Decision:

The Protest is dismissed.

Procedure:

1. On December 12 the parties were summoned at 2015 hrs (Documents 54 and 55) and heard. The following persons were present during the hearing:

On behalf of Mercedes:

‐ Ron Meadows

‐ Andrew Shovlin

‐ Paul Harris (Team Legal Counsel)

On behalf of Red Bull:

‐ Jonathan Wheatley

‐ Christian Horner

‐ Adrian Newey

Red Bull, as an “interested party” was permitted to attend.

The hearing adjourned at 2050hrs to allow Red Bull to consider its response in further detail and reconvened at 2130hrs. The Race Director was present for the reconvened hearing.

2. At the hearing there were no objections against the composition of the Stewards panel. The parties set out oral arguments and addressed the questions asked by the Stewards.

3. At the hearing the parties referred to the documents submitted. Red Bull submitted graphical information (Exhibit A).

The claims of Mercedes:

Mercedes claimed that there were two breaches of the Sporting Regulations (Article 48.12) namely that which states “..any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car” and “…once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap.”

Mercedes argued that had this been complied with, Car 44 would have won the race. They therefore requested the Stewards to amend the Classification under Article 11.9.3.h of the FIA International Sporting Code.

Red Bull’s arguments in defence:

Red Bull argued that

1. “Any” does not mean “all”.

2. The Article 48.13 of the Sporting Regulations states that the message “Safety Car in this lap” is the signal that it will enter the pit lane at the end of that lap.

3. That therefore Article 48.13 “overrides” Article 48.12.

4. That Article 15.3 gives the Race Director “overriding authority” over “the use of the safety car”.

5. That even if all cars that had been lapped (8 in total, of which 5 were allowed to overtake the safety car) it would not have changed the outcome of the race.

Race Director’s Evidence

The Race Director stated that the purpose of Article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that

would “interfere” in the racing between the leaders and that in his view Article 48.13 was the one

that applied in this case.

The Race Director also stated that it had long been agreed by all the Teams that where possible

it was highly desirable for the race to end in a “green” condition (i.e. not under a Safety Car).

Conclusions of the Stewards:

The Stewards consider that the protest is admissible.

Having considered the various statements made by the parties the Stewards determine the following:

That Article 15.3 allows the Race Director to control the use of the safety car, which in our determination includes its deployment and withdrawal.

That although Article 48.12 may not have been applied fully, in relation to the safety car returning to the pits at the end of the following lap, Article 48.13 overrides that and once the message “Safety Car in this lap” has been displayed, it is mandatory to withdraw the safety car at the end of that lap.

That notwithstanding Mercedes’ request that the Stewards remediate the matter by amending the classification to reflect the positions at the end of the penultimate lap, this is a step that the Stewards believe is effectively shortening the race retrospectively, and hence not appropriate.

Accordingly, the Protest is dismissed. The Protest Deposit is not refunded.

 

[medicnick83]

There is another one