Quote:
Originally Posted by mstets
Not worthy of discussion? Seems to me that scrutineering should be done prior to the race by folks in charge, not by lawyers afterward.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by E.B
My understanding is that Haas had been advised of discrepancies in their floor, along with other teams. They were given until Monza to fix said problem areas.... Haas said they could not fix the problem in time, maybe by Singapore they could, but other teams with similar changes to make could meet said Monza deadline. Haas did not make the changes by Monza as requested and rightfully got protested by another team who had themselves fixed a similar problem within the (Monza) time limit given by the FIA.
Haas took a chance and lost out. They were treated fairly.
|
The cars go through scrutineering at the start of the weekend. There are so many parts and set up changes that can be made post-scrutineering that the cars that race can be very different from those presented at scrutineering - hence the post race checks.
But in this case as E.B. says Haas were fully aware that their car was non-compliant (and Renault also knew this). The issue is that Haas had no way of making their car compliant for Monza as they're waiting on externally sourced parts (or so they claim). So the car has been 'illegal' for some time and they were told to get it sorted by Monza - the supplier hasn't come up with the parts so Haas had the choice of run illegal or not run at all.
If Haas had finished outside the points I doubt whether Renault would have bothered with the protest - it's just that Grosjean's points jumped Haas ahead of Renault in the Constructors Championship.