BAR Penalty - Your Thoughts

[JayVee]

Why is doublestandards only an issue when targeting Ferrari / FIA??

What are you talking about ? Double standards of what ? You mean when Ferrari is cleared of having an illegal car and blaming the way the measurement is done. Give me a break!

Who is being penalised here ?

Also please tell me when last did the FIA overrule their own stewards ?

And the car was not declared illegal and so they didn't cheat.

The 600 kg min weight, can you find anywhere where it says without fluids ? and if so is that without all the oils in the car. Could it be that all the cars don't comply because all of them are underweight when drained of all fluids.

Good thinking from BAR led to this.

What I am saying is clarify the rules so this doesn't happen.

[Kapel]

I agree with JV.
Its the rules which need to be clarified.The court didnt find anything illegal,but still the penalty.

I'm for rules K-D,but the rules are not clear enough.BAR just took advantage of a loophole(or whatever u call it) in the rules.If something on the car was found illegal,then i wouldnt have been suprised/shocked if they were expelled from the championship too.
The FIA knew about their secret fuel tank since Malaysia and i'm sure they must have weighed the cars earlier too,y the fuss now is my question???

And K-D,I DO NOT term Ferrari(its my fav team too) as cheaters cos they are testing more than the other teams.I agree with Michael's statement yesterday that testing should be limited in terms of Mileage rather than days,considering tyres.

[K-D]

Why is doublestandards only an issue when targeting Ferrari / FIA??

What are you talking about ? Double standards of what ? You mean when Ferrari is cleared of having an illegal car and blaming the way the measurement is done. Give me a break!

Who is being penalised here ?

Also please tell me when last did the FIA overrule their own stewards ?

And the car was not declared illegal and so they didn't cheat.

The 600 kg min weight, can you find anywhere where it says without fluids ? and if so is that without all the oils in the car. Could it be that all the cars don't comply because all of them are underweight when drained of all fluids.

Good thinking from BAR led to this.

What I am saying is clarify the rules so this doesn't happen.

Ferrari was aquitted on a technicality, like Michelin was not thrown out of F1 on a technicality.

There is no technicality involved in reading the technical regulations stting that the car must weigh 600 kg. And the FIA clarified the weight of a car in 1994 to mean drained of fuel.

Your dislike for Ferrari cloud common sense. If a team is found breaking a rule they should be punished, BAR broke the rules and are being punished. The reason that the appeals court is not throwing them out of the championships, is that they can not find intent. But they have found gross negligence.

The rules are very clear on the specific issue that this matter is revolving around, and BAR Honda will not appeal this decison.

Nick Fry will be out of a job within the next two months.

You and many others keep howling for unfair advantages of Ferrari testing, regardless of the testing agreement not being a rule anywhere. But when a team "on your side" break the rules, you find that in order.

That is a doublestandard.

[Kapel]

You and many others keep howling for unfair advantages of Ferrari testing, regardless of the testing agreement not being a rule anywhere. But when a team "on your side" break the rules, you find that in order.

That is a doublestandard.

[Julian Mayo]

[quote="K-D"]Welll well well.

So you find it in order for a team to race cars, that are not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations that the championships is governed by??

And you all find it in order that a teams representattives decide not to drain the car of fuel when asked to??

You find it in order that a teams representative can satet that the car is empty of fuel, even though there is still +10 liters left in the car??

So breaking a written rule is in order?? While not adhering to an unwritten agreement, which you do not consider yourself party to is not??

Why is doublestandards only an issue when targeting Ferrari / FIA??



I am sure you can answer all your own questions to OUR satisfaction [/i]

[JayVee]

Ferrari was aquitted on a technicality, like Michelin was not thrown out of F1 on a technicality.

There is no technicality involved in reading the technical regulations stting that the car must weigh 600 kg. And the FIA clarified the weight of a car in 1994 to mean drained of fuel.

This is also a technicality but you don't want to see it that way for some reason. Interpreting a rule differently is a technicality.

And what is this about 1994 ? Where is it ? Why isn't it mentioned in the regs or the FIA statement

And what does this mean in your opinion

WHEREAS, taking into account these requirements, the car, at all times of the event, must weigh with the driver a minimum of 600 kg and that Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations, and leaves the FIA as well the competitors in a regrettable state of uncertainty,

They didn't refer to your claim about 1994. Why ?

Your dislike for Ferrari cloud common sense. If a team is found breaking a rule they should be punished, BAR broke the rules and are being punished. The reason that the appeals court is not throwing them out of the championships, is that they can not find intent. But they have found gross negligence.

What does my dislike of Ferrari have anything to do with this ?

The rules are very clear on the specific issue that this matter is revolving around, and BAR Honda will not appeal this decison.

Nick Fry will be out of a job within the next two months.

Maybe they won't and maybe Fry will be out of his job but you can't be sure. That is just your opinon and an arrogant one too

You and many others keep howling for unfair advantages of Ferrari testing, regardless of the testing agreement not being a rule anywhere. But when a team "on your side" break the rules, you find that in order.

That is a doublestandard.

Again the Ferrari issue was brought up by you. I didn't bring it up and it isn't the topic here.
And just to remind you that I wasn't at all happy with BAR parking their cars in Oz. If I see something wrong, I'll say it whether it is Ferrari, BAR or by The Cute himself


I am saying clarify the rule just like what happened with Michelin. Banning them is wrong

[Kapel]

Jenson Button with no points till European GP!!!

With his contract saying that he needs to have 75% of the points of the 2005 Champion,which now seems unlikely ,Would he consider moving to Williams-Cosworth next year???

[K-D]

Ferrari was aquitted on a technicality, like Michelin was not thrown out of F1 on a technicality.

There is no technicality involved in reading the technical regulations stting that the car must weigh 600 kg. And the FIA clarified the weight of a car in 1994 to mean drained of fuel.

This is also a technicality but you don't want to see it that way for some reason. Interpreting a rule differently is a technicality. - No it is not about a technicality, it is about a car being weighed and found to be underweight.

And what is this about 1994 ? Where is it ? Why isn't it mentioned in the regs or the FIA statement - You asked where the information could be found, I state that the FIA clarification of 1994 advised all teasm that the weight of a car was drained of fuel. This is the part that makes it not a technicality.
And what does this mean in your opinion

WHEREAS, taking into account these requirements, the car, at all times of the event, must weigh with the driver a minimum of 600 kg and that Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations, and leaves the FIA as well the competitors in a regrettable state of uncertainty,

They didn't refer to your claim about 1994. Why ? - Please read your quote once more. This is BAR Honda's argument, not the stated opinipon of the appeals court.

Your dislike for Ferrari cloud common sense. If a team is found breaking a rule they should be punished, BAR broke the rules and are being punished. The reason that the appeals court is not throwing them out of the championships, is that they can not find intent. But they have found gross negligence.

What does my dislike of Ferrari have anything to do with this ? - Y

The rules are very clear on the specific issue that this matter is revolving around, and BAR Honda will not appeal this decison.

Nick Fry will be out of a job within the next two months.

Maybe they won't and maybe Fry will be out of his job but you can't be sure. That is just your opinon and an arrogant one too -

You and many others keep howling for unfair advantages of Ferrari testing, regardless of the testing agreement not being a rule anywhere. But when a team "on your side" break the rules, you find that in order.

That is a doublestandard.

Again the Ferrari issue was brought up by you. I didn't bring it up and it isn't the topic here. - Of course I bring it up, since that is exactly why you reek of doublestandards. The first page in this thread is crying and bemoaning over a team caught red handed breaking the rules. But a team running according to the rules you can go on and on about "cheating" based solely on your dislike for them. That makes Ferrari relevant in this thread, as an example of your doublestandards.

And just to remind you that I wasn't at all happy with BAR parking their cars in Oz. If I see something wrong, I'll say it whether it is Ferrari, BAR or by The Cute himself


I am saying clarify the rule just like what happened with Michelin. Banning them is wrong

[Julian Mayo]

KD, can you categorically state that Ferrari have never cheated, or manipulated the rules to their favour, or protested against other teams unduly, or stepped out of agreements,written or otherwise to gain advantage?
The topic at hand is about BAR,and the judgement which has been handed down, which has upset a lot of thoughtful formula 1 fans

[K-D]

KD, can you categorically state that Ferrari have never cheated, or manipulated the rules to their favour, or protested against other teams unduly, or stepped out of agreements,written or otherwise to gain advantage?

No.

[Julian Mayo]

KD, can you categorically state that Ferrari have never cheated, or manipulated the rules to their favour, or protested against other teams unduly, or stepped out of agreements,written or otherwise to gain advantage?

No.

Then kindly allow us to continue with our breast-beating and wailing about BAR and the FIA.

[K-D]

KD, can you categorically state that Ferrari have never cheated, or manipulated the rules to their favour, or protested against other teams unduly, or stepped out of agreements,written or otherwise to gain advantage?

No.

Then kindly allow us to continue with our breast-beating and wailing about BAR and the FIA.

Why??

[JayVee]

K-D you just choose bits of a reply and reply to

- BAR interepreted the weight rule differently. Conisder that whatever you want if you don't like to call it a technicality

- If there is such a thing about your claimed 1994 clarification then it would have been mentioned. The fact that the court stated this: "Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations" means that they don't have anything to support that a car has to be drained as well.
If there was such a rule then it would have been a very simple case and BAR would have been in breach of that rule.

- The court didn't say BAR broke any rule.

- Please point me to where I said Ferrari testing extra is cheating.
If you care to check that thread, read my first post and then come back here and apologise

[K-D]

K-D you just choose bits of a reply and reply to

- BAR interepreted the weight rule differently. Conisder that whatever you want if you don't like to call it a technicality - The rule states 600 kg at all times, the car weighed 595 kg - How can you interpret that??

- If there is such a thing about your claimed 1994 clarification then it would have been mentioned. The fact that the court stated this: "Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations" means that they don't have anything to support the car has to be drained as well - Yes they do have that, but they do not need that since the car was underweight.
- The court didn't say BAR broke any rule. - No, they are saying that the car was not in accordance with the rules.
- Please point me to where I said Ferrari testing extra is cheating.
If you care to check that thread, read my first post and then come back here and apologise - I have no intention of reading all your posts.

[Julian Mayo]

K-D you just choose bits of a reply and reply to

- BAR interepreted the weight rule differently. Conisder that whatever you want if you don't like to call it a technicality - The rule states 600 kg at all times, the car weighed 595 kg - How can you interpret that??

- If there is such a thing about your claimed 1994 clarification then it would have been mentioned. The fact that the court stated this: "Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations" means that they don't have anything to support the car has to be drained as well - Yes they do have that, but they do not need that since the car was underweight.
- The court didn't say BAR broke any rule. - No, they are saying that the car was not in accordance with the rules.
- Please point me to where I said Ferrari testing extra is cheating.
If you care to check that thread, read my first post and then come back here and apologise - I have no intention of reading all your posts.

KD, maaaate,admit it! You have just been given the "drum"