Quote:
Originally Posted by RWill2073
This has always frustrated me with any rule-making body, be it sports or politics or whatever. (Promise I'm not getting political). They make rules, those get exploited with loopholes or unintended consequences. So, they like on more rules, while keeping the flawed first rule. Then it happens again. And again. Until they have so many rules/laws in place that they contradict each other, leading the most clever to exploit loopholes or use the rules to their advantage until further clarifications happen. But none of these rules are stripped down upon new information being made available, just more rules tacked on. So you end up with situations like this, where you're compliant in one way, but not another, and the only way for this to not happen is for all solutions to be known beforehand. Which, if we had that, teams would already be there, and this would all be pretty boring and pointless.
|
I think it is for this reason why we have the driver aid methodology in the rules.
You can draw boxes around what is allowed, but it is proven and accepted that there are 10 teams and many people trying to fight it and they will find a way. However over years we had the direction from the fans that they didn't want driver aids. Hence specific rules on specific areas, but also an over arching rule.
Don't have it and when something comes up there is outrage of another sort.
All the details are not presented and there are other parts of the solution, if revealed, would spill the beans on Renaults tech. to other teams. From what I can see I wouldn't have implemented a DSQ in this case, rather just asked Renault to stop using it in this way for the next race. However, I accept that I haven't read everything I could on this and even if I did may be missing things.