Why arent they being penalised?

[z2252314]

The whole idea of the grooved tyres was to limit the tyres' contact patches and thereby reduced their cornering power. Also, the FIA always said they reserved the right to challenge a tyre supplier if the tyres' performance increased as it wore down.

Obviously, even if Michelin respect the letter of the rule, they don't respect the spirit of the rule. Just like they were trying to do last year with their asymmetric tread idea. The Bridgestone tyres, you will notice, have a raised edge along the outer circumference of the thread, which guarantees that the thread width will not vary as it wears down or is deflected by downforce.

As for the timing of the FIA change (as a championship is being decided), how valid is the championship anyway, if some of the players involved were stretching the interpretation of the rules and getting an unfair advantage?

The FIA have not changed the rules. They have changed a scrutineering procedure. The rule states that there is maximum permissible width for the tyres. Scrutineering is there to make sure that the cars are safe and comply with the regulations. One could assume from this change that there is a suspicion Michelin are not complying with the spirit of the rule, perhaps by making a tyre which "spreads" at operating temperature. If this was found to be the case, even a small increase in the tyres' width would yield a significant performance advantage. And if it's 290mm instead of 270mm, then it's cheating. Plain and simple.

[Peter Mallett]

This is covered elswhere but for clarity, what on earth do the words "spirit" or "intent" or anything else have to do with rules and contracts. What is written is what it means.

In our regs there is a statement which says something like "for the avoidance of doubt, if its not specifically permitted its excluded."

In this case Michelin have obtained approval or acceptance from the FIA so it is peculiar that the FIA should want to change now.

Mods, Can we merge this?

[BootsOntheSide]

Hold on a minute. It's not even clearly established as to what the rule was - whether the tyres should be measured after the race (with changes during the race making them illegal) or pre-race (allowign the circumferences to change during natural operation).

Also, Bridgestone's old tyres were breaking the rules, and were banend after Thursday at Mondaco - the precise time at which Ferrari fell behind the Michelin teams.

[Don K]

Originally posted by z2252314
...
Obviously, even if Michelin respect the letter of the rule, they don't respect the spirit of the rule. Just like they were trying to do last year with their asymmetric tread idea. The Bridgestone tyres, you will notice, have a raised edge along the outer circumference of the thread, which guarantees that the thread width will not vary as it wears down or is deflected by downforce.

As for the timing of the FIA change (as a championship is being decided), how valid is the championship anyway, if some of the players involved were stretching the interpretation of the rules and getting an unfair advantage?

The FIA have not changed the rules.
...
One could assume from this change that there is a suspicion Michelin are not complying with the spirit of the rule, perhaps by making a tyre which "spreads" at operating temperature. ...

I don't agree.

There's no good reason to punish them for what they have done before the rule clarification was published.

And although the clarification was given 10 days before the next race, it was only 7 days (including a weekend) before the start of the race weekend (thursdays).

So I would expect that the FIA won't give any unconditional non-financial penalties on this issue this weekend.

[Peter Mallett]

I believe in the Bridgestone case it was because they were using two different compounds on the same car, although the compounds were approved just not for use at the same time.

Can't agree with you that the rule isn't clearly established. There is a criteria in the rules and without any contradiction you can reasonably only take the "when new" status as bieng the point for inspection.

Reasonable is a legal position BTW. "Spirit", "Intent" etc. aren't.

[Liz]

Oh, never mind. Give TGF the damned WDC and end the season today.

[Glen]

The extra-wide Michelins are every bit as illegal as the different compound Bridgestones - Ferrari were prevented from using the mixed compounds (never actually proved as far as I recall) and now Michelin teams will be stopped from breaking the rules.

Exactly how do you see that as being unfair Liz?

[Mal]

The answer is simple: if its illegal stop it, if its not everyone should shut up. Clarity is whats needed, but that is a rare commodity in F1

[KC]

According to the rules, the tire must meet the legal specifications at the time of scrutineering. What the tire is doing at speed is not measurable by scrutineering nor is it within their purview unless it becomes an obvious safety factor. While this might not meet the spirit of the rules, it does meet the legal explanation of the rules and that is all that matters as far as the FIA is concerned. The FIA may change that ruling but I see no possible way to measure an "expanding tire" that could not be explained by scrubbing due to adverse camber or other reasons on the track.

If this is an issue where you feel that Ferrari is not being allowed to compete due to infractions by their opponents, then one can say that Ferrari's barge boards from two years ago did not meet the spirit of the rules and they received zero penalty for it then. Why should the Michelin runners face penalty now?

[Adam43]

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=42743

[Mr V]

Originally posted by KC

If this is an issue where you feel that Ferrari is not being allowed to compete due to infractions by their opponents, then one can say that Ferrari's barge boards from two years ago did not meet the spirit of the rules and they received zero penalty for it then. Why should the Michelin runners face penalty now?

Thats an easy one to answer, Z numbers is a TGF/Ferrari fan, so when he sees someone threatening his driver/teams position it's not within the spirit

[Jordi]

Exactly V...

Honestly, it would benefit Jacques if the Michelin tyres weren't legal, and therefore I should be claiming that Michelin is cheating, but I think they were within the spirit of the rules.
It's like someone saying "You must have 3 bottles full of water at 9 am". But that someone didn't say they had to be still full at midnight!

[Jordi]

Originally posted by Jordi
within the spirit of the rules.

I wanted to mean "the letter of the rule"

OK, another example. The letter of the rule was respected by Williams and Jordan when the high cockpit protections were adopted in 1996. But Benetton and Ferrari argued that they hadn't respected the "spirit of the rule" as Williams had done the protections in a clever way and legally, but as Ferrari's protections were way less aerodynamic, they protested. Why should the punishment that was given then (none) be different from now.

[Andrew2001]

Everyone, repeat after me: FIA = FERRARI INTERNATIONAL AUTOSPORT council.

Nuff said.
I am a McLaren fan from the beginning, but I really would be happy to see either Kimi or Juan Pablo stick it to FErrari this year, show them who really is boss, Ferrari always were the first losers across the line and I hope that trend is back in place by the end of this season, and the start of next season.
HANAA KIMI.


PS what ferrari want, they get, no questions ifs buts or maybes, Ferrari is FERRARI, they are the greatest team on earth, ho ho, in fact, no, they aren't, rather just a scarlet red team plastered in white stickers which is a sad shadow of it's former rich and historic self.
Oh if only Enzo saw what was happening........

[alfasud]

Originally posted by Glen
The extra-wide Michelins are every bit as illegal as the different compound Bridgestones - Ferrari were prevented from using the mixed compounds (never actually proved as far as I recall) and now Michelin teams will be stopped from breaking the rules.

They all push the rules to the limit and slightly over at times. What makes me laugh is the people believe that team "x" never do that sort of thing, while team "y" are at it all the time.

To answer the original question, they haven't been penalised, because unless the tyre has been found over width at an official scrutineering (pre or post race), they are given the benefit of the doubt. What's changed is the FIA has now said it will enforce it's rules.... but they haven't done so yet, so no penalty.

[GTV27]

the problem isn;t the tyres, its badly worded rules that leave ambiguities and loopholes for the teams and suppliers to exploit - either the rules should be watertight or not be there at all.

[Don K]

Originally posted by GTV27
the problem isn;t the tyres, its badly worded rules that leave ambiguities and loopholes for the teams and suppliers to exploit - either the rules should be watertight or not be there at all.

The problem is, no set of rules can be absolutely waterproof.
So in the long run, every rule may need some rule clarification at some point.

In general, organisations like the FIA should not issue such rule clarifications during a season (on short notice).

On the other hand, organisations like Michelin should not try to use the loopholes unless they have some "legal" alternative at hand (like a tyre which will comply with the clarified rule).

At the moment, Michelin says they want to push the rule clarification to next season.
And Ferrari says they might protest against earlier race results.

So it will probably result in the rule clarification being enforced for either the last two, or the last three races.

-------

Anyway, I don't see a reason why the michelin teams should be punished. They were using tyres which they thought were legal.

Michelin *did* take some risk by running tyres they knew to be possibly illegal, but I don't think they should be punished in this case. However, their gamble brings extra costs to the teams that run Michelin tyres, and that doesn't feel quite right...

[RWC]

nice way the fia are handling this....
Just like the bridgestone compound substitution thing they swept under the carpet..........

[kristof14]

I think that part of the excitement of F1 is seeing the different interpretations of the rules that teams come up with, surely if all teams on the grid followed the rules letter for letter we'd have 20 identical cars on the grid. The fact that someone has found a way of bending the rules should just mean that everyone else has to come up with new ways of keeping up surely that's what keeps the progression of technology in F1 going!

[Fluffster]

The ugliest circumvention of the "spirit of the rules" I remember is Ferrari's "legal" traction control.

'nuff said.

[Led ZeppF1]

Originally posted by z2252314 And if it's 290mm instead of 270mm, then it's cheating. Plain and simple. [/B]

Not that plain and simple.

Please read again, and again, and again, FIA sport regulation article 77 c...

[R]

Originally posted by z2252314
Obviously, even if Michelin respect the letter of the rule, they don't respect the spirit of the rule.<snip> As for the timing of the FIA change (as a championship is being decided), how valid is the championship anyway, if some of the players involved were stretching the interpretation of the rules and getting an unfair advantage?

Have you any idea what F1 is about at all? Stretching the rules (without breaking them) is being done all the time in F1. You always try to gain an advantage within the existing framework of rules.

And where do you get this "spirit of the rule" stuff from? Who's to say Michelin hasn't acted in good faith? The only signal coming from the FIA until now is that the tyres are measured before the race. So who's to say anyone should think otherwise?

Maybe you should have a look at what you would say if the names were reversed here. The FIA can change the rules, fine, but don't change them three races from the end. Such rule changes should take place between seasons, not during.

[alfasud]

Originally posted by R
Maybe you should have a look at what you would say if the names were reversed here. The FIA can change the rules, fine, but don't change them three races from the end. Such rule changes should take place between seasons, not during.

Ummm, but haven't the names already been reversed this season - wasn't it alleged that Ferrari/Bridgestone were mixing compounds in an illegal way, so they stopped at the Monaco Grand Prix. Surely you aren't suggesting that Ferrari/Bridgestone should have been allowed to continue the alleged illegal mix of compounds because they had already been getting away with it for a while?

Maybe you are saying they should have been allowed to get away with it for the remainder of the season?

It seems that a rule has been broken (and yes Led Zep, we've read it several times now and it says 270mm and there is nothing to prevent enforcement of the rule at race end) and should be enforced at the next race.

Going back over previous races is another matter, and in that case Michelin may have a defence in that they took a different interpretation of the rule and it was up to the FIA to clarify if required.

[OVERSTEER]

Originally posted by Liz
Oh, never mind. Give TGF the damned WDC and end the season today.

We might as well do that, and whilst they're at it, rename the championship so it reads the FIA FERRARI! Formula one world championship!

F1 Sucks big time! i'd love to have the pleasure and the power to throw Ferrari and TGF out of the world championship!!

How about 1994 when Benetton were facing charges of tampering with their refuelling rig the FIA let them off with no punishment, it seems to me that the FIA are very desperate to have TGF as the champion, whoever he is driving for, in this case Ferrari, in 1994 with TGF, Benetton.

[Knowlesy]

I think its a bit unfair to blame TGF for all this OVERSTEER!