Mclaren got away the first time too. They too were found guilty of possessing the intellectual properties but not penalize as there was no proof they used the information at that point of time. (many seems to conveniently choose to ignore this)

It is only when Alonso and De La Rosa came forward with their evidence that it became proven beyond doubt that they not only have the information, but they also used it in their simulator.

Renault went to the FIA with that information which again, shows that they have some information and again, no proof that they use it.

So unless someone go forward with proof that shows Renault did something with those information, it will stay at this stage where they will not be punish.

It's all the same thing over again and yet people claim FIA acted differently.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 7 2007, 10:15 PM

Only if there's a second hearing with new evidence that they use it

I'm not defending FIA I'm just sick of all this pro Macca anti everyone else. I've read it a thousand times every where else and macca/lewis fans seems to conveniently, selectively remember certain incident only and accuse FIA of being bias against macca.

Did you not read about Alonso and De La Rosa email about the info being run in their simulator? That was why they were penalize. They use it. How then would like to define the term "use"? Only when they actually implement it on their car? Well, unfortunately, for the rest of the world out there, use is when you use the data in any way, not just specifically to implementations.

McLaren have the data, they use it in their simulator, and also exploit it to get the FIA change the rules about floorboard (is this anti Macca by the FIA?). Without emails for Alonso and the engineers, do you think the FIA can penalize McLaren? No, and in fact that was the decision when they first found McLaren guilty or possessing intellectual properties data but they couldn't proof that they use it.

What then do you think about this first hearing? McLaren got away as well under same circumstances? McLaren should have been fined during the first hearing?

Renault have the data. But so far no evidence that they use the data. What can FIA do without evidence?

ps: It doesn't matter how one obtained the info. Did mclaren went forward to the FIA and alerted Ferrari that a certain someone is passing data on? No they didn't. possession of intellectual properties is a crime.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 8 2007, 04:19 PM

Those emails stated that the information was used in the simulator. That prove that they use, not just have.

Again, lets not forget the first hearing. McLaren was found guilty of having Ferrari's data, but they are not penalize because FIA as no proof that they used the data. Same goes for Renault, they have to prove that not only Renault have the data, but they actually use it, in their simulations or whatever ways there is. This is the stage where Renault is right now.

If you say Renault should be punish at this stage, that means McLaren should be penalize at the first hearing as well. Don't this meant something to you? That the same decision was made here?

That Alonso and Pedro's email was the decisive factor in the second hearing. That's why FIA agrees to give both of them immunity in exchange for the emails. If that email was useless, FIA will not give them any immunity. Nobody will be interested in it. But the email was important. So important that Alonso could use it to threaten Ron, that Ron had to go to Max informing him that Alonso has some new evidence first before Alonso can do so himself. This goes to show how important they were.

About the floor, McLaren lodge a complain about Ferrari floor design stating that it's exploiting some loop holes in the rules, thus urging FIA to change the rules to cover the loophole.

How did McLaren knew about ferrari's floor design? It's not the wing we're talking about, its a floorboard which no one can see it at all.

Without the stolen technical data, there's absolutely no way McLaren would know about the details of Ferrari's floorboard design. The complain was targeted at Ferrari, and obviously they have to go forward with some proof. Otherwise, Ferrari car has always passed the FIA test and you can't argue against that without any information about the design. How would they know Ferrari's floorboard behavior when they are not the one who's testing other car's floorboard.

Then that would still raise the question of how did McLaren knew Ferrari was exploiting a gray area?

It was a gray area, just like in a wing test, there's no way of 100% simulating a condition during real situation when the car is running, so all the FIA can do is to place weight at certain point, so long as it passed that test, it is legal. There's no other way for McLaren to know about Ferrari's floorboard without any information. Furthermore, those information is 700 pages, I doubt its just diagrams and specifications. Lots of other data may be gain from that.

Of course exploiting a loop hole isn't right (although every team does that in F1 due to its highly technical nature), but that's what the FIA are for, they are there to ensure the cars are legit. It's not for other team to conduct espionage on their rival team to see if they are breaking any rules.

Aero can be simulated in computer too. Programs such as AutoCAD if I'm not mistaken, was once used by someone to simulate the effect of split rear wing. Of course not as good as the real thing like wind tunnle.

That's right, the FIA needed concrete evidence (otherwise McLaren would have appeal), and those emails was the concrete evidence

As you mentioned, it is still being use. Of course every team would want to do that, but the difference here is that the data is something that's not suppose to be known to other team. Teams can test other team's visible design such as new wing and stuff like that. But for other details that they cannot obtained visually, obviously its wrong to even have them.

And yeah, I do agree that since having those information is itself illegal, anyone who have them is wrong and should be prosecuted.

I agree that there's no concrete evidence that mclaren directly apply those data on their car (if they did, the punishment would have been worse, they are probably banned for 2007 and 2008 already). The point is regardless of how useful simulators are, its still being use. Doesn't matter what the outcome it, using it is wrong, in fact having those data is wrong by law, but obviously FIA didn't judge merely on copyright issues (otherwise, Renault too should and would have been punish)

Simulators are equally important in the entire R&D process, not just in F1 but many other industry as well. Simulator helps narrow down the results they are searching for, because its not practical to test everything in the wind tunnel and race track. Simulator helps narrow everything down to a point where its worth building it and test it in the wind tunnel, which is more expensive than simulator but cheaper than building the actual component. At that stage, changes can still made, but the range of changes is already narrowed down by simulator, so to reduce the cost of keep on rebuilding new aero components scale model

Trail and error is only practical in simulator, and that's where they do such thing to find the best design

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 10 2007, 04:55 PM

The email just show what the team is doing with it. Not what the drivers are doing with it.

From what I could gather at other forums, it seems that the ruling could partly be due to the fact that Renault went forward to the FIA with those information, so maybe, who knows. Can;t say the FIA has been perfect with their judgement lately.

What I don't like is their lawsuit against ITV commenter, forgot who that was. That's worse than Renault ruling.

This is what I meant earlier. Selective memory.

FIA made ferrari changed their wing = FIA ferrari assistance
FIA made ferrari change their floorboard = FIA ferrari assistance

Ferrari put on intermediate tire while FIA stated all must start with wets (japan I think). And rightfully so, Ferrari need to start at the back of the grid. Whatever happened, rules are still rules. But does this show FIA pro Ferrari?

Either you have some memory issue or you just conveniently ignore those issues. Either way you have some issues.

FIA aren't perfect with their rulings, but if you want to question their decision, question their judgment itself, but don't ever make up such a crap about FIA pro other team.

Here's one cold hard fact you need to swallow. If FIA really was pro Ferrari and anti mcLaren, McLaren would have long left F1. Any team who felt being biased against would not stick around in F1. The team don't run on water, they need real money. It's funny how you finds FIA to be pro Ferrari when those people who are running those team, those real people who are involve in it, doesn't think so. Maybe you should run your own championship.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 11 2007, 01:09 AM

Yeah, my mistake there about the pits. But nevertheless, the rule was enforce, whereby they are force to pits of face the black flag.

Renault should be punish base on intellectual property rights. And to be honest here, FIA do not punish base on that. The FIA are really enforcing their rules from sports performance point of view. Of course, this is then a subjective view, which I'm sure some may argue its unfair just because Renault were trash last season and so they got away and so on. It gets complicated lol, but in this case, you can have your own view. I'm not saying its right or wrong, just FIA judge from performance point of view. Not the final performance, I mean they look into stuff where team can gain and things like that.

Of course, we've gone over a thousand times whether or not McLaren gain anything, but what done is done, lets just leave that out of the picture.

Frankly I don't care Renault is punish or not. What I dislike is people accusing Ferrari of getting preferential treatment from FIA. It's unfair, Kimi won his championship and he deserve it, there's no preferential treatment there.

And for the record, my post about this anti ferrari thing wasn't directed at you lol. I quoted someone else, as you can see.

I am aware not every McLaren fan are as childish as that.

And yes, there are many point to address if one wants to accuse FIA of being pro Ferrari. There's no reason for FIA to do that, they risk losing their integrity not just in F1, but in a majority of all motorsports out there.

And lets put this straight. No team owner thinks FIA are biased against them or pro Ferrari. So the question here is if the people are involve in F1 itself doesn't think so, and yet some disgruntle fan claims so (again, not saying its you) who would you believe?

Teams would pull out of the sport the moment they are being biased against, its not cheap being in F1, there's no point if they are in it knowing they will lose. It just doesn't happen, and it's sad to see some people try to blame it on everyone but the own team when a team doesn't do well.

lol, no one likes FIA, they are like being in Samy Vellu's position, they get all the flak when someone is unhappy. But when someone is happy, nobody gives them credit.

But I doubt anyone ever accuse of FIA being bias in a sense that they plot the downfall of the team. No, FIA cannot play into the outcome of the championship because if they do, team principal would do more than just complaining to a magazine column. What people are accusing the FIA of being anti McLaren and pro Ferrari is something very serious, and the FIA would not have gotten away easily just like that.

Sometimes they are tough, sometimes they are sparing, either way it will always cause dissatisfaction among people. But we all know that they cannot take sides. Whatever people accuse them of are simply just to justify their support for their own team.

more championship contender means more fun
If Alonso go to honda or toyota, his 2008 championship is as good as over.

interesting though Alonso had a 2 year contract that have some sort of option allowing him to leave after 2008 if he wants. Alonso has been pushing for a 1 year contract all the while, I wonder what he's planning for 2009. It's not like Ferrari have any vacancy or Ron Dennis retiring (after his fallout with Ron this year) in 2009.

This post has been edited by Hornet: Dec 11 2007, 03:38 PM

Massa renew his contract so, 2009 Ferrari will still have both same drivers. I think Alonso should know that but... he must know something we don't

And Ferrari gets punishment as well, no?
michael certainly did got punish for Monaco, as much as other drivers eventually will.

What wrong did Ferrari do anyway last season. I know everyone is picking on the floorboard thing, but that's a gray area, which means that places where its not wrong to be in as long as it remains gray. FIA changed it to completely cover that portion, and so everyone then needs to move away from it. Simple as that.

Renault too have their mass damper last season. Did they cheated? absolutely no, because that was a gray area. and to be completely honest, I don't know why FIA decided to rule that a mass damper inside a car is aero. Whatever, it previously doesn't fall into movable aero and so thats why it's not wrong for Renault to do that.

There's a difference between breaking the rules and being in a gray area. It's not wrong to be in a gray area but once its covered, then you have to move away from it.

If FIA are to bias in favor of Ferrari, they would not have change those rules.

Ferrari did a better job, and so did Kimi, simple as that. last 2 years, Renault and Alonso did a better job and they win the title they deserve.

In light of that letter, Max has asked the WMSC to cancel its February hearing, and thus closing the case completely.

I don't think they will favor Heikki. Lewis is their best shot at the championship, they have to back Lewis up.

After last season, I think they can learn something from their equality. The only thing that equal is both driver ends up with equal points.

Up to a point, Heikki will have to back Lewis up.

astro starsports delay the qualifying i think

If RTM also don't show, that's gonna suck.

Its funny how we wants to host a F1 race and yet we can't even broadcast F1 on TV properly.

I wonder if its our line or ITV itself

Very lag for me too