FIA's definition of justice?

Question

The FIAs decision not to punish Renault for exactly the same crime as Mclaren were found to be guilty of proves beyond all doubt the negative bias against Mclaren. The same breach of the rules: Mclaren is fined a record $100m, yet Renault escape scot-free. Can anyone explain that to me please? Is that the FIA's version of fairness, equal treatment and justice? Pathetic. Mclaren should now prosecute the FIA for every last Ferrari cent they have.

Answer 1

Well said Andrew and Val. I fully agree despite the usual Ferrari tribal fans rushing to put in their two cents worth of red crap as soon as someone dares say something against the Ferrari tribe. Even though we are actually criticizing the Fia here, they still rushed to intervene and this is proof if ever there was need of how the Fia is not fair and neutral but in fact a Ferrari (F) International (I) Assistance (A). Excellent comments and proofs of this are given on one of the best and my favourite website http://www.grandprix.com
I have lots more to say on this and other such matters. In fact I have written a long commentary on this but that is on my McLaren website.

Answer 2

I just want to use Three Putt's argument to show what the FIA has become.
If the FIA stated that Ferrari's moving floor was legal to use then it shows a remarkable level of incompetence within the FIA as they don't seem to understand their own rules.

3.15 Aerodynamic influence:
With the exception of the cover described in Article 6.5.2 (when used
in the pit lane) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific
part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance:
- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly
secured means not having any degree of freedom).
- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap
between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited
under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the
bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may
under any circumstances be located below the reference plane

3.17.4 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when
a 500N load is applied vertically to it at a point which lies on the car
centre line and 380mm rearward of the front wheel centre line. The
load will be applied in an upward direction using a 50mm diameter
ram, teams will be required to supply a suitable adapter when such a
test is deemed necessary.

2 rules here which the Ferrari was in breach of. Even if article 3.17.4 was added after the Australian GP the Ferrari was still illegal when you consider the rule about aerodynamic parts being rigid as the the floor of an F1 car is an integral part of the overall aerodynamic package. The Ferrari floor was designed to deflect at high speeds so it would reduce drag, therefore the car was illegal yet the FIA seem to think it was not. Very strange indeed.
Before the Ferrari fans have a go at me, this isn't about me trying to make Ferrari look bad, but to highlight the inconsistencies in the ruling and governing of the sport by the FIA. It's not necessarily a Ferrari bias but when you look at some of the decisions made recently can you blame some people for thinking that?

***edit***

I just thought I'd add to this. I do agree with what most people have said. Renault have been found guilty of the same initial offence as Mclaren and have been punished in the same way. I believe Mclaren will not make an appeal against the decision anyway so I suppose the question and it's subsequent answers mean very little now.

Answer 3

All this McLaren/Lewis mania is getting out of hands.

McLaren clearly breach the rules, all the evidence was there. Both De La Rosa and Alonso had willingly share the evidence, so it has been proven beyond doubt.

What McLaren did:
Accuire intellectual properties that doesn't belong to them
Run those illegal data they have in their simulator
Exploit information that was illegaly obtained to get the FIA to change the rules about a car's floor board.

It's funny how many seems to forget that FIA changed the floor board rule because McLaren lodge a complain against Ferrari. All people remembers is McLaren being punish, but they totally disregard all other FIA ruling.

F1 did NOT start after Lewis joint this year. So lets not forget Renault has had their mass damper banned last year, Ferrari has had their wings changed by the FIA for god knows how many times now.

McLaren decided to play those games so its only fair that they now swallow their own bitter pill.

Its easy if you just selectively pick certain incident at your will and accuse FIA of being bias, but you too know that's not right. You completely disregard all other incident that has had happened in F1

McLaren is no paragon of virtue. They cheated and they pay the price, so stop bringing up that same thing over and over again. Give it a rest already.

Answer 4

Get your facts straight! First, dow do you know this is the "exact same" breach of the rules before all the facts have been published? No two espionage cases are exactly the same.

Like hickskicks said, Mclaren got no penalty after the first hearing. However the FIA and WMSC reserved the right to reopen the matter if new evidence came to light, which it did (the Alonso emails). The FIA statement will be similar for Renault. If new evidence comes out, expect another hearing.

The Ferrari car in Australia was not illegal. It has been said time and time again. It conformed to FIA rules in place at the time of the race! An FIA spokesperson confirmed this (again) last month, saying the call was within the rules! The rules were subsequently changed, but the car was not illegal at the Australian GP. Whether you are a Ferrari fan or Mclaren fan, make an effort to learn the facts.

Answer 5

WIthout knowing why the FIA made such a decision will be clearer tomorrow when they release the official transcript.

But at this point I am very disappointed with the result. In a nutshell a ex-Mclaren employee went to Renault brought over proprietary data. Shared it with Renault and they possbily used it for there benefit. This with many Renault employees knowing that it was proprietary McLaren data. To me it sounds like Stephenygate just with different players.

If it is the same action there should be the same result!!! No if ands or butts about it!!! I feel that the FIA are trying to make an example of Team McLaren in an unjust way. Same crime should should mean same punishment. I think that with the possiblity with Alonso going to Renault next year that if Renault pulls out becuase of the outcome that Alonso would be left without a drive. In the end meaning that there would be that much less people tuning into races and less money from sponsorship and manufactuer backing.

It is really terrible to make decisions in this manner. Look at McLaren they may/ have lost some sponsors witht the whole fallout.

Answer 6

I don't think the FIA have a bad habit of picking on Mclaren, but i have noted and it has been pointed out by Steve machete and David Hobbs that the FIA have a really bad attitude towards people that question their judgments, look into your history and see how many times someone has appealed an FIA ruling and had it overturned, then see how many times the appeal turned into a harsher punishment on the appealing team, you'll find that people and teams are punished for questioning their judgments

Answer 7

Hello this year the FIA have been pro mclaren. Bsides the first appeal concluded with mclaren walking away guilty but not fined or anything so you really gonna keep on goin like that?

JG Race 1194, 30 years of racing? Incredible, I almost mistaken you for only having 3 seconds in racing from your obviously talking out of of both of your @$$es. And you're a really curious little weasel aren't ya? Not so happy you couldn't sneak a peek at other's profile? You know you should just leave the F1 area and return when you can answer right, not crap that sound worse than a woman with pms. BOOBOO's right andrew, pick your best answer, benefits with the three points and saves his adoring stalker like followers from having more work to do. What got you twisted in a bunch? RedbullRacing's got a point. And hickskicks is like 15 or sumthin, why don't YOU try to set an example for her. Cuz right now, it's the other way round. Ahh well gotta go, my date's here.

Answer 8

It really looks as if this question should be posed at an American Presidential candidate TV debate! Lots of mudslinging from all sides! Or maybe this question would be best for a TV reality show.
As for the actual question, I'll just wait to see if Renault will get a fine later. But think about it from this perspective. Would Renault have recieved information at all if not for McLaren? Just something to think about!
But if actual evidence is presented, and Renault not punished, then everyone will see that Bernie only drives Ferraris, and Renaults, and doesn't have a Mercedes in the garage!
I really don't think Renault benefitted from alot this year, seeing how their team performed.
Last, but not least. Was there a rule in place at Australia allowing for movable floors in F1 cars? Or was this a grey area rule? I need help with this question, as it has come up for debate numerous times this year.

Answer 9

the FIA is biased, no doubt about it. I just hope they learn a lesson from this year. they must make rules and stick to them, regardless of if it is Ferrari, McLaren or even Force India. personally, as a McLaren fan, I think this decision is total cr@p, but as an F1 fan I just hope that's the end of all this bull and next year we can all just concentrate on watching the racing. Lets all just draw a line under this year and start again eh.

Answer 10

I think is is difficult for lay people to comment on FIA's interpretation of the rules, without being party to the actual testing undertaken by the FIA it is not possible to say if the got it wrong or right about the enforcement (or not) of a particular rule. There are serious issues with F1 though. The huge sums of money involved make this a business not a sport, and the FIA must ensure they are beyond reproach when it comes to the application of the rules, and the teams should simply stop cheating.