FIA's decision regarding McLaren right or wrong?

[Gerard]

Mika Hakkinen can keep his points from Austria but McLaren have to give back the constructors points.
Did the FIA make the right decision?

In order to support your opinion it might be a good idea to read Sean Owen's report on http://www.f1test.com
Under the subject 'features' click on 'FIA computer catch fencing in need of repair?'

Here's my opinion:

First of all, I seriously doubt that McLaren broke the seal on purpose. The box wasn't opened since the other seal was still intact.
However, the rules say the seals are mandatory.
One seal was missing, so according to the rules the car should have to be disqualified.
Even if the FIA forgot to place the seal, as some rumors were suggesting, it was McLaren's responsability to check that out.

I think two things have to be looked upon in this case.
First, was there an advantage gained or not.
There was not, even the FIA admits that.
Second, should the rules be followed, yes or no.
If no, the FIA would have opened the door to more infringements.
If yes, the car should be disqualified.
When the car is disqualified, so should the driver, even if he's not responsable.
Car and driver are inseparable. Without a car, a driver cannot finish the race. Without a driver, the car won't move an inch. (please no jokes about drivers pushing cars)

I'm not a Hakkinen or McLaren hater, most of you will know I love the sport as a whole and I respect one driver as much as the next one.
Nevertheless it's my opinion the FIA made the wrong decision.

What say you?

[Liz]

I agree - either the whole or nothing. The way they have "punished" McLaren is a transparent attempt to appease Ferrari and to "keep the championshp close" - and as such it neither follows the rules nor sets any precedent for the future so that teams will know what to expect next time.

One wonders if a missing seal had been found on the 6th place car, what would have been the outcome. Or if the McLaren had happened to be the sixth place car when the missing seal was discovered - assuming it would have been discovered.

[botsquad]

i think this was the just decision. since driver and team championship points are seperate, neither mh or any other driver should have his points stripped away for a team mistake.

[JAM]

Hi Gerard,

I agree with you 100%. However, we know FIA ethics when it comes to the politics of the sport. It was very clear after the desicion made with the result of the Malaysian GP 1999. It is the same situation, Ferrari was out of the rules, regardless if there was an advantage or not. They rule in favor of TGF and Ferrari of course keeping the TV sponsor happy.

Unfortunately, all the variables that play in this type of situation has to do with economic interest of the series and not with the correct application of the rules in the sport.

Max and Bernie, please keep the sport alive! Cut the BS and lets race!

[Minardi fan]

A team mistake, not a driver error. Punish McLaren, not Mika.

[Jay]

So essentially, they are both guilty and innocent?

I'm confused.

[EERO]

I agree with you, Gerard, rules must be applied uniformly. As much as I would regret the decision if Hakinnen were to have lost the win, I think that the integrity of the sport demands an equitable application of the rules.

That said; there are some dumb rules in this sport.

[Sharky]

I almost bursted into laughter when I heard the veredict. I mean...is it that Mclaren gained an advantage with it but Hakkinen didn't. Ha!! And if there wasn't anything wrong with the car then why punish mclaren???.

It's as simple as this...either mclaren tampered with the box and helped both mclaren and hakkinen win the race or they didn't do anything with the box and so neither hakkinen nor mclaren benefited from that situation. But this veredict....come on....

[Unknown Soldier]

I agree with what most people here are saying. You break the rules and you should have to face the appropriate consequences.

It seems to me that FIA just found the middle ground on this ruling.

[downforce]

Give Schumi back his (plank)points...no Damon no Adelaide'94!!!!

[Valve Bounce]

I have asked this question several times already. What caused the seal's removal? Could running over carbon fibre debris on the track have ripped it off? If so, then I don't think this is any more consequential than a rear view mirror broken during a race. The rules also say, as someone else pointed out, that the car must have two rear view mirrors. I can only say that I am glad that Mika got to keep his win. I also think that McLaren will get those points back in future races necessary to win the Constructors Championship. I think many of us expected this outcome.

[Roy2]

Perhaps this ruling was the FIA's way of establishing that it's the team's responsibility to ensure that the seals are in place at all times. After all, if one is found to be missing after a race, look at the rigmarole that has to be gone through to determine whether or not tampering has taken place.

Viewed in the light of this, the ruling makes sense. McLaren is penalized and fined to establish the precedent, even though no tampering was found. The team is held resposible for the missing seal, no tampering was found, no unfair advantage was gained, so Hakkinen keeps his points.

[Ed-f1]

I'm always sceptical when people suggest bias of the FIA towards Ferrari. BUT this decision maximises Ferrari's lead in the constructor's championship AND the driver's chamionship. Makes you think...

[Valve Bounce]

I have just read Sean owens report as indicated in Gerard's original post on this thread. This just shows what a farce the whole decision of the FIA really is. I suppose, in the light of what can be done, is for the FIA to allow Traction control anyway. I have suspected for several races that some cars are running traction control at the starts. No wheelspin at all. Think of the starts before traction control came in - lots of wheelspin by most of the cars (Minardi just didn't have the power to spin the wheels).

[Cameron]

I just find it very sad. The key issues are uniformity. I have no problem with punishing McL and/or MH but if so it should be applied consistently over the whole teams involved in F1.

Am I getting confused but when there was that fuss with F recently wasn't one of the main justifications of the ruling there being no advantage to F from the discrepancy.

I must admit that once being a F fan I now tend to watch it in the hope of seeing the administration being thwarted in their attempts at being fair!

Yes, I really did love F1 but more and more the old spirit seems to reside only in teams like Minardi.

Good on you Minardi Fan.

[Peter Mallett]

FIA's decision regarding McLaren right or wrong?

YES.

Right to disqualify. Wrong to split between team and driver.

[DC]

See in seasons to come when people look back on this season they will look at the driver championships and they will notice that the 2 driver points dont match up to the constructors for that year. It should of been 1 or the other! Mika Should of had his Points totaly taken away or kept! Not half/half. DC ???

[jvilleneuve2000]

If the team had cheated then it would of been right to take away drivers and constructors points. But it was just a seal that the team should of checked. It gave no performance advantage so Hakkinen should keep his points.

[Pamella]

Wrong decision.

It does not matter whether or not there was an advantage or not for either team or driver. A rule was either violated or it wasn’t; disqualify both McLaren and Mika Hakkinen or neither.

BTW, by my reckoning, as far as the WCC goes, Mclaren would have fared better if Hakkinen was disqualified. As it is, they take 6 points from Coulthard’s second place and Ferrari take 4 from Barrichello’s third… a Mclaren advantage of two points. If these two drivers were promoted to first and second respectively, Mclaren would take ten points and Ferrari six – a Mclaren advantage of four points.

The winner’s of this mess?
Mika Hakkinen, Michael Schumacher and Ferrari.

[angst]

Just read about Le Mans class winner disqualified for tank bein 1L over the limit. Now I'm sure there really is no advantage there, and that it was through the heat variations throughout the race, but the DQ is final. So a rule is a rule is a rule. If your car doesn't comply with the rules then you're out. Simple.
Money, money, money...that's ALL that matters in F1

[Ralf's Girl]

I think that the FIA's decision was correct - they have punished the people in the wrong. If Hakkinen had been disqualified, it would have been the wrong decision, as the seal missing was not the fault of the driver. However, it is the team's responsibility to ensure that all the rules are met, and if this doesn't happen, then the team should be punished.

[Unknown Soldier]

Ralf's Girl,

However, it is the team's responsibility to ensure that all the rules are met, and if this doesn't happen, then the team should be punished.

Interesting theory but, Hakk is part of the team

[Ralf's Girl]

Yes, but it's not up to Hakkinen to make the cars and see that they are within the rules, is it?

[Roy2]

I wonder what the rule actually says? Gerard says "One seal was missing, so according to the rules the car should have to be disqualified". Gerard grounds everything he says on fact, so I'm inclined to believe him. But isn't this the first time this rule has been applied, and shouldn't any rule allow for consideration of mitigating circumstances?

No rule can forsee the circumstances of every possible situation. These circumstances, if the rule says a missing seal means car disqualification, were obviously not forseen by the rule. If the codes were not tampered with, and if it is reasonable to conclude that the seal came off accidentally (or perhaps that it was never affixed in the first place), then it's reasonable on the part of the FIA to tacitly recognize the inadequacy of the rule in making its decision.

The FIA decided, to ensure that the teams excercise the necessary vigilance with respect to the seals, to establish a precedent for the teams to follow. 'If you don't keep an eye on the seals, and if we have to go through an investigation of this sort again, then you know what will happen, even if we don't find any wrongdoing'. This ensures that, even if the letter of the rule is not followed (disqalification), the door to more infringements has not been opened.

The FIA has in its ruling made it clear that the driver has no responsibilty for ensuring that the seals are on. The ruling is that the team is responsible, not the driver. The team loses the points and the money, not the driver. In the real world it is possible to distinguish between the responsibilities of the team and the driver, and the FIA has ruled accordingly.

The FIA had better make every effort technically possible to ensure that the seals can't come off accidentally. What if a team discovers immediately after a race that a seal is missing, and reports it immediately? It would not be believed and would be penalized. This is a circumstance perhaps unforseen by the ruling and should be addressed immediately.

[AL Racing]

A wrong ruling no question IMO, two seals are mandatory and if one is broken the car/driver should be DQ. It doesn't matter if there was no performance gain, rule are rules and there can be no exceptions. Once there is, where does it end? This ruling generates a snowball effect the next time someone gets a DQ. FIA seems to apply DQ too their convinience. Why should Salo be DQ, last year's frontwing is no "performance gain" IMO, he should get his point back too. And why can't Schumacher get his 6 points back for overtaking Hill on the formation lap '94 when he got DQ and a 3 race ban. It just goes on and on...
This happens when not ruling according to the rules because of "exceptional circumestances" as FIA said about Hakkinen keeping his points.