58 replies to this topic

[christoff]

Does anyone recall if there was a timescale given for stewards' decisions explanations being made public? There's nothing there yet

FIA Media Centre

[Clatter]

I don't think we will be getting a proper explanation.

[wingwalker]

Originally posted by christoff
Does anyone recall if there was a timescale given for stewards' decisions explanations being made public? There's nothing there yet

FIA Media Centre

Was there ever an explanation by stewards? All there is to it it's in the files on the site, and they only state things like 'caused a collision' there.

[christoff]

I was under the impression that MM stated that this year we would see greater transparency and the reasoning behind the stewards' decisions would be made public - or maybe it was all a dream

[gibbo1]

They were meant to post full explanations of decisions on the media centre website

[VoidNT]

Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by christoff
I was under the impression that MM stated that this year we would see greater transparency and the reasoning behind the stewards' decisions would be made public - or maybe it was all a dream

What he says and what he does don't always coincide.

[stevvy1986]

Originally posted by VoidNT
Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

i'd love to know the reasoning behind that post

[VoidNT]

Originally posted by stevvy1986
i'd love to know the reasoning behind that post

Sorry forgot to add this:;)

[pingu666]

Originally posted by VoidNT
Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

+1

thats pretty much the explanation given..

[Ferrim]

Originally posted by stevvy1986


i'd love to know the reasoning behind that post

It's called sarcasm.

[Buttoneer]

I think it's probably clear why in these circumstances. Perhaps they will only provide a full explanation when the matter is contentious?

[krapmeister]

Originally posted by VoidNT
Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

Originally posted by Buttoneer
I think it's probably clear why in these circumstances. Perhaps they will only provide a full explanation when the matter is contentious?

Shouldn't matter if its contentious or not.

[Szoelloe]

Originally posted by stevvy1986


i'd love to know the reasoning behind that post

sarcasm?

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by krapmeister

Shouldn't matter if its contentious or not.

You're right of course but nevertheless it might make a difference to the FIA if only in the amount of work it creates.

[krapmeister]

Originally posted by Buttoneer
You're right of course but nevertheless it might make a difference to the FIA if only in the amount of work it creates.

But should it really? Doesn't take much time to upload a file...

[Mat]

i was wondering when this would come up. Will the media follow up once they get to KL?

[undersquare]

Anyway it's clear already that Max's window-dressing, even if they eventually carry through with it, hasn't improved the quality of the decisions. Like last year Donnelly has given the Stewards' office Max's culture of punishment for the sheer pleasure of it. Two punishments, both wrong.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by krapmeister


But should it really? Doesn't take much time to upload a file...

No but publishing a decision is not the same as publishing the reasons for it. Not only does publishing the reasons take more time to put together if it is to be understandable, but it also potentially opens up the appeal process.

[krapmeister]

Originally posted by Buttoneer
No but publishing a decision is not the same as publishing the reasons for it. Not only does publishing the reasons take more time to put together if it is to be understandable, but it also potentially opens up the appeal process.

I take your point - however if the Max really wanted to, it wouldn't actually take much to do. It doesn't need to be out within the hour or even the next day.

But we all know Max doesn't raelly want to do it.

[Tenmantaylor]

Originally posted by VoidNT
Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

[Snap Matt]

I had understood that they would make public any other information used to reach their decision, such as CCTV footage from the track or whatever. Maybe they've found that Bernie won't let them release unofficial footage...

[simpson]

There is the issue of a possible Toyota appeal. That might delay the posting of an explanation.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by krapmeister


I take your point - however if the Max really wanted to, it wouldn't actually take much to do. It doesn't need to be out within the hour or even the next day.

But we all know Max doesn't raelly want to do it.

I think you're right. I also agree that broadly these explanations can and should be done very quickly along with the additional camera angle footage that the stewards relied upon.

But I still think that where the decision is reasonably transparent anyway, we don't need to see an explanation, just the decision.

What we need is a good challenging journalist to ask the question.

[christoff]

In the following link there is the link to the originally posted page, stating the following would be available, but as of the moment the page is still blank.

Post-Event Information
Full Stewards’ Report & Video, Technical Reports & Championship Points.

http://fia.com/EN-GB.../home_page.aspx

So it seems that they do plan to do it, maybe they will wait 'til all possible appeals are dealt with first?

[Bernd Rosemeyer]

I'm looking forward to their reasoning.

[krapmeister]

Originally posted by Buttoneer
What we need is a good challenging journalist to ask the question.

Where's John Pilger when you need him lol...

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by VoidNT
Who you are to ask such a clever people like Mr Mosley and his allies for explanation? You're a stupid F1 fan, that's what who you are. Even if you given a full and proper explanation you wouldn't be able to understand and comprehend it. So don't distract really clever people who work 18 hours a day for the benefit of the sport, you halfwit.

[GerardF1]

It would not be in the FIA's best interests to try and explain its decisions.

This is the 21st century! Trying to explain goat entrails & tea leave readings to the average person on the street is such a waste of time. They could not comprehend such accurate arbitrators of the truth.

For extreme cases there is the new “Superior Mosley Inquisition Team, Elite Division, also known as “SMITED” for short.

When a team or driver has been SMITED they will know the full power of the dark side, sorry, Justice. The full power of Justice

This will entail huge and expensive hearings – lawyers, and 4 or 5 call girls with various abilities and skills.

If the Grand inquisitor is not pleased He can ensure that the subject of the investigations is demoted, fined, banned, unbanned, promoted, flogged, drawn & quartered.

[daishi255]

Possible reason as to why the explanation of the steward's decisions have not yet been released:

http://allenonf1.wor...le-in-malaysia/

Seems Hamilton could be back in the stewards room soon. While I'm aware that it is April Fool's Day, I don't think the James Allen or Auto Motor und Sport would joke about something like this (or at least I would like to think that they aren't stupid enough to do so about something that could potentially be very nasty)

[D.M.N.]

Anything written on April Fools should be taken with pinch of salt.

[Darth Sidious]

I'm not falling for this one yet....


...But if it's true then he's gonna get busted for this one.

If he told the stewards that he did not slow down and moved off line while consulting the dash the implication is that Trulli took the place back without Hamilton's consent, hence Trulli's penalty.

Then if he told a reporter that the team told him to let him past and he didn't mention this to the stewards then it looks like he deliberately misled them into thinking that he had not voluntarily yielded the place.

That's cheating, to me. To gain one measly point.


Now what bugs me about this is the radio traffic. Did they listen to it before passing judgement? And if so surely they would have heard any instructions so would have known that Hamilton was told to move over, which means they would have known initially that the position change was voluntary. SO my conclusion is that they didn't listen to radio traffic, it was one drivers word against another, Hamilton truthfully answered that he didn't slow down in order to avoid getting a penalty himself for doing that, but lied when explaining why he pulled over in the hope of keeping that extra point.

Nobody knows more than Hamilton how valuable one point can be at the end of a season......


Oh boy, I hope this is an April fools joke....

[wingwalker]

Even this story is true, it only puts even more emphasis on the fact that F1 steward are useless knobs. How on earth Trulli was supposed to know the reason for which Hamilton is slowing down, be it dashboard, willingness to give the place back or technical failure? He saw a car moving off line and slowing down so he passed it, then slowed down himself to give Hamilton opportunity to regain the place, which didn't happen so he stayed there. To penalize any driver for this is dumb beyond belief.

[MrAerodynamicist]

the FIA have released the evidence.

[Buttoneer]

I hope we get to find out exactly what the lies were...

[djellison]

We were promised transparency - and things are currently more opaque than ever.

[krapmeister]

Originally posted by djellison
We were promised transparency - and things are currently more opaque than ever.

Just Max playing his games...

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by krapmeister


Just Max playing his games...

I read that Donnelly is going to talk to Vettel about the Melbourne decision. Last year Donnelly was part of the Steward's decisons - but his name no longer appears on their decisions. But I suspect his role is just the same, except that its not public. If my presumption is true, then its another step in having less transparency.

[bradleyl]

That's not accurate Melbourne Park.

Donnelly, this year as last, is Chairman of the Stewards. He is non-voting unless a casting vote is required on any decision. He sits in all the meetings and can be asked to speak to the drivers by the stewards - as in the case of speaking to Hamilton at Spa. His role hasn't changed.

He is the only person who would be competent to speak to Vettel, given that the other stewards change at each event.

I don't think anything is more or less opaque than last year.

[bradleyl]

As per the Sporting Regulations:

12) OFFICIALS
12.1 From among holders of an FIA Super Licence the following officials will be nominated by the FIA :
- Three stewards one of whom will be permanent and appointed the non-voting chairman ;
- A race director ;
- A permanent starter.
12.2 From among holders of an FIA Super Licence the following officials will be nominated by the ASN and their
names sent to the FIA at the same time as the application to organise the Event :
- One steward from among the ASNs nationals ;

[Rob]

Originally posted by bradleyl
Donnelly, this year as last, is Chairman of the Stewards. He is non-voting unless a casting vote is required on any decision. He sits in all the meetings and can be asked to speak to the drivers by the stewards - as in the case of speaking to Hamilton at Spa. His role hasn't changed.

But at Spa he did advise the stewards how they should vote. The chairman of the stewards should not be so close to Max.

[bradleyl]

I don't know if that has been substantiated or not. I know the stewards asked him to put the questions to Lewis and he did so; I don't know if he advised them how to vote. Given only he and the stewards would have been in the room at the time, has he been quoted as saying this? Or has one of the stewards? I'm not doubting you, just asking the question.

[Rob]

Originally posted by bradleyl
I don't know if that has been substantiated or not. I know the stewards asked him to put the questions to Lewis and he did so; I don't know if he advised them how to vote. Given only he and the stewards would have been in the room at the time, has he been quoted as saying this? Or has one of the stewards? I'm not doubting you, just asking the question.

I'm certain that I read this but unfortunately I can't remember which publication it was in.

[bradleyl]

I remember hearing the same but can't work out how anybody would know this unless it came from one of the individuals involved in the process.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by bradleyl

I don't think anything is more or less opaque than last year.

Exactly the problem.

[bradleyl]

Only if you feel there was a problem in the first place. Personally, I don't.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by bradleyl
I don't know if that has been substantiated or not. I know the stewards asked him to put the questions to Lewis and he did so; I don't know if he advised them how to vote. Given only he and the stewards would have been in the room at the time, has he been quoted as saying this? Or has one of the stewards? I'm not doubting you, just asking the question.

My post was about transparency. Or the lack of it. Just look at your own question.

Also the rules show that Donnelly is in fact a Steward.

There was a permanent Steward, of whom Max took a disliking too, due to a his independence. He was "retired", and some time later spoke out against Max.

Soon Max appointed a different position, and used Donnelly, whom some have said is Max's protege. The company of which Donnelly is I think Chairman also works for the FIA, and also an F1 company. Which thereby effects his ability to be independant.

Because he is permanent, while the other Stewards are only at the odd race, he has absolutely enormous power. Its there, because he is always there. Its not written down - but its very real. IAnd afterall, that is why Max put him there.

I think a permanent steward is a good idea. But he should be totally independent, and approved of by all the motor racing teams/competitors. Actually, that's what F1 had before. He (or she) should also be subject to the approval of the racing teams/competitors.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by bradleyl
Only if you feel there was a problem in the first place. Personally, I don't.

Probably the circus looks different when you're on the inside looking out but, from where we sit, stewards decisions have been arbitrary and inconsistent. I personally welcome the idea of seeing the evidence which leads them to particular conclusions.

[Andy35]

http://www.fia.com/e...s_decision.aspx

radio transmission of Hamilton.

Regards

Andy

[daishi255]

Finally:

http://www.fia.com/e...s_decision.aspx

But it only seems to be for the LH/JT incident. Would be nice to hear what explanations there are for the other things they ruled on.