482 replies to this topic

[femi]

I think he is a closet Verstappen fan. He couldn't help himself. He deserves the door in my view, I think he is stained in F1. A ruined career definitely not! There are many deep pocket Verstappen out there that will even make him richer! RB might even give him a roaming ambassador role, replacing that hapless Coulthard. 

 

Masi was just too  willing to do wrong.

[rootten]

thumbs up form me, he's doing a great job!

[FirstnameLastname]

When’s he next racing? Good to see a fan club

[Fastcake]

Dhillon, on 15 Feb 2022 - 16:53, said:

Masi was doomed as soon as Laitifi hit the wall. A different decision with Hamilton finishing ahead on old tyres would be unacceptable to Max’ fans.

Perhaps it's better to consider an alternate scenario, where Latifi crashed a couple of laps earlier, leaving plenty of laps left on the board for the rules to be correctly applied and the race resumed with Hamilton ahead of Verstappen on old tyres with three laps to go. Many people would have been very angry over the outcome, but as it would have been done correctly according to the rules, the feeling would be one of awful luck rather than injustice.

[CharlesWinstone]

jjcale, on 14 Feb 2022 - 19:11, said:

I think it is consensus here (and among most fans, pundits etc) that Masi failed to follow important rules at a crucial stage of last year's drivers' championship - causing great embarrassment to the sport and arguably interfering with the outcome of the WDC (seeing it was a zero-sum, binary contest between LH and MV at that stage) .... Even most MV fans accept this, I think.

Very likely, his name will go down in sporting infamy ... a byword for incompetence at the most crucial moment.

But I am now at the stage where I actually feel sorry for the guy ... I dont think he was corrupt (at least there is no strong evidence pointing to this) ... did he favour Redbull over Merc? probably -- you could hear it in just the tone of his voice when he spoke to Redbull team members compared to their opposite numbers at Merc.... but did he set out to intentionally break the rules to benefit MV/Redbull? I doubt it. ... So he just probably made a huge mistake at the most important moment of his professional life on the biggest stage imaginable.

I dont see how he can continue in his role .... I cant even imagine why he would want to - given the magnitude of what he did.... he clearly needs a time out. He needs a lot of support and help - I hope he has family, friends and good people around him ... I am genuinely worried for his mental health and well being.

His future now hangs in the balance - and I think he will probably be made the scapegoat for F1/Liberty going overboard with spicing up "the Show" last season.... if it is true that all the teams agreed that, if practicable, the AD race should not end under yellows, that was just greedy seeing it was such a tense and gripping season - one which did not need any additional or artificial enhancement ... after all, the title decider in 2012 finished under yellows - and no one had a problem with that. ... so I think Masi is probably going to be thrown under the bus even whilst the FIA and Liberty refuse to accept that anything wrong was done... I can see them letting the press and fans trample all over his name to save theirs ... I expect that they will let him bear all the blame ... all by himself ... this guys life may well be ruined when this is all over.

But what do you think?

How do you think Masi should be dealt with? looking at the situation as fellow human beings first and foremost... should he be allowed to give his side and explain what pressures he was under from above to deliver exciting races (and not just safety, as is his role)? ... should he be allowed to admit his error and apologise to LH. Merc and us the fans? ... and be allowed to start to heal, as a person.

Will he ever work in motorsport again? and should he?

Whatever he does or whatever is decided I hope that there will be consideration for him as a human being ... what he did cannot be undone - so there is no point in seeing him destroyed now.... and that does not just go for those who are incensed by his failings in AD - but also for those who might be tempted to hang him out to dry and use him as a scapegoat.

Just a rubbish post.

[RekF1]

Sorry if this has already been discussed but is this true?

https://www.theguard...-lewis-hamilton

Is it a new Ferrari deal in reverse?

Edited by RekF1, 15 February 2022 - 21:19.

[w00dy]

RekF1, on 15 Feb 2022 - 21:19, said:

Sorry if this has already been discussed but is this true?

https://www.theguard...-lewis-hamilton

Is it a new Ferrari deal in reverse?

 

Hopefully this is just a stopgap before MBS publicly announces everything later this week.

 

or they tell every party what they want to hear, behind ironclad NDAs, Lewis gets his apology, Max gets his WDC again, Masi gets a huge severance and no-one finds out....

 

or they are just effing with us, wanting to change nothing and try to get Lewis to retire.

[Tenmantaylor]

Dhillon, on 15 Feb 2022 - 16:53, said:

Masi was doomed as soon as Laitifi hit the wall. A different decision with Hamilton finishing ahead on old tyres would be unacceptable to Max’ fans.

Lol! Max fans complaining the rules were followed. Imagine the allegations of corruption, the outragw because Masi didn't cheat!

[aportinga]

Tenmantaylor, on 15 Feb 2022 - 22:38, said:

Lol! Max fans complaining the rules were followed. Imagine the allegations of corruption, the outragw because Masi didn't cheat!

 

Silly post.

 

May have some screaming that had MM not screwed up all season that MV would have locked up the WDC before Jedah but there would be zero complaints about ending under RC or SC - it's happened before with an accident this late under these circumstances in many formats of racing.

 

But hey if that justifies some of the ridiculous nonsense coming from the other side of the fence then have at it.

Edited by aportinga, 15 February 2022 - 22:44.

[Tenmantaylor]

aportinga, on 15 Feb 2022 - 22:44, said:

Silly post.

May have some screaming that had MM not screwed up all season that MV would have locked up the WDC before Jedah but there would be zero complaints about ending under RC or SC - it's happened before with an accident this late under these circumstances in many formats of racing.

But hey if that justifies some of the ridiculous nonsense coming from the other side of the fence then have at it.

Sorry what points did MM cost MV?

Let's start with the 18 he was gifted for not getting DQd after brake testing an opponent.

Then add the 7 Masi gifted in Abu Dhabi by deciding Max doesn't get to have all the rule breaking fun.

Then add the 12.5 points awarded by Masi for winning a race with no racing laps.

I count that as +37.5pts Masi points for Max.

OK that's unfair, take 7.5 off Lewis got for coming 3rd in the non-race.

+30

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 15 February 2022 - 22:57.

[rockdude101]

Tenmantaylor, on 15 Feb 2022 - 22:55, said:

Sorry what points did MM cost MV?
.

 

Not necessarily costing Max, but he illegitimately gave Lewis 25 points by not disqualifying Lewis at Silverstone. 

[Fastcake]

rockdude101, on 15 Feb 2022 - 23:16, said:

Not necessarily costing Max, but he illegitimately gave Lewis 25 points by not disqualifying Lewis at Silverstone. 

Penalties are the responsibility of the stewards, not the race director.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

I may not be Lewis's biggest fan by any stretch (I know, shocking from a Brit eh) but I feel like I've missed something here. What did Lewis do that deserved a DSQ at Silverstone? Serious answers only please

Edited by HuddersfieldTerrier1986, 15 February 2022 - 23:30.

[MightyMoose]

MKSixer, on 14 Feb 2022 - 21:07, said:

One may add up Whiting's 10 most questionable rulings, multiply them by 5 and you won't even be halfway to the negative impact of Masi-Gate.

 

Given Whiting's most notable error resulted in a driver dying, I really really think your hyperbole is out of control.  And I think that you really ought to study Indycar around the 2010/2011 season to see utterly ridiculous decisions impacting races, titles & lives.  

[AlexS]

Masi do not have a place in F1 .

But i think the incentives in the position he was are also not healthy. F1 always have tension between sport and commercial aspects and that is a part of its appeal. But today commercial aspects are almost totalitarian for F1. This do not bode well.

 

 

My biggest fear is that in contested situations in 2022 Mercedes will be "compensated" at expenses of a third party.

[Tenmantaylor]

rockdude101, on 15 Feb 2022 - 23:16, said:

Not necessarily costing Max, but he illegitimately gave Lewis 25 points by not disqualifying Lewis at Silverstone.

Wow. Just wow. For attempting a legitimate alongside before turn in overtake then having some slight understeer and trying to back out. That is the very definition of a racing incident. There is no way in hell Lewis could have made that accident happen to Max only at that speed in that corner. It was hard racing, a 50:50 that went against Max. There was no reason to give Lewis a penalty. Let alone a DQ.

What evidence exists Lewis drove into Max? None. Did he open his steering? No. Did he steer left? No. Did he lift to back out? Yes.

Stop drinking the Red Bull.

[P123]

rockdude101, on 15 Feb 2022 - 23:16, said:

Not necessarily costing Max, but he illegitimately gave Lewis 25 points by not disqualifying Lewis at Silverstone. 

 

How often do disqualifications happen for racing incidents where one driver is found more at fault than the other?  I'm sure it was the stewards dishing out the penalty anyway, so not sure you can fault Masi entirely for not giving the penalty you wished to see.

[Acathla]

Masi needs to stay, but with help. What prove is there that Charlie Whiting would have done it better? None. AD was a mess, but his intent was right we went car racing. Give him a chance this year with more capable people and it shouldn't be a problem. In the end it would also funny if he would stay to offend and piss a lot of people off. 

[Rocket73]

RekF1, on 15 Feb 2022 - 21:19, said:

Sorry if this has already been discussed but is this true?

https://www.theguard...-lewis-hamilton

Is it a new Ferrari deal in reverse?

 

See this is what has bugged me from the start of this whole saga. Mountains of hate piled on Latifi, Max and Masi and yet relatively little on the FIA. It's the FIA who everyone should be focusing on. 

 

Sacking Masi would only provide a scapegoat and the next RD would soon be under the same pressure, make the same mistakes.

 

The FIA deciding to not reveal findings of the enquiry should have caused a twitter storm but the response is fairly lame.

[TheFish]

Rocket73, on 16 Feb 2022 - 07:59, said:

See this is what has bugged me from the start of this whole saga. Mountains of hate piled on Latifi, Max and Masi and yet relatively little on the FIA. It's the FIA who everyone should be focusing on. 

 

Sacking Masi would only provide a scapegoat and the next RD would soon be under the same pressure, make the same mistakes.

 

The FIA deciding to not reveal findings of the enquiry should have caused a twitter storm but the response is fairly lame.

That's only because it hasn't been confirmed. We're all waiting for the report. If it's buried, there will be lots of people shouting loudly that it proves that Masi and Red Bull colluded. Why would they hide a report if it shows there was nothing wrong with Abu Dhabi?

[w00dy]

TheFish, on 16 Feb 2022 - 08:01, said:

That's only because it hasn't been confirmed. We're all waiting for the report. If it's buried, there will be lots of people shouting loudly that it proves that Masi and Red Bull colluded. Why would they hide a report if it shows there was nothing wrong with Abu Dhabi?

 

It is baffling. I don't know how the investigation/analysis changed its scope. But the itnitial statement promised "...clarity to be provided to the participants, media, and fans about the current regulations to preserve the competitive nature of our sport while ensuring the safety of the drivers and officials."

 

Now we get what? Secret clarity?

[as65p]

TheFish, on 16 Feb 2022 - 08:01, said:

That's only because it hasn't been confirmed. We're all waiting for the report. If it's buried, there will be lots of people shouting loudly that it proves that Masi and Red Bull colluded. Why would they hide a report if it shows there was nothing wrong with Abu Dhabi?

Many must have missed the memo that they should wait for the report to do that. Besides, I seriously doubt the possibility of there not being any shouting, regardless whats in the report.

[Rocket73]

TheFish, on 16 Feb 2022 - 08:01, said:

That's only because it hasn't been confirmed. We're all waiting for the report. If it's buried, there will be lots of people shouting loudly that it proves that Masi and Red Bull colluded. Why would they hide a report if it shows there was nothing wrong with Abu Dhabi?

 

In my experience SM isn't well known for 'waiting to see what happens'. 

 

I really want to see the FIA itself held to account. The Bianchi enquiry still gets to me.

Edited by Rocket73, 16 February 2022 - 08:23.

[TheFish]

as65p, on 16 Feb 2022 - 08:13, said:

Many must have missed the memo that they should wait for the report to do that. Besides, I seriously doubt the possibility of there not being any shouting, regardless whats in the report.

Indeed, imagine the shouting if they say Masi made a mistake and Max is a tarnished Champion.

[as65p]

TheFish, on 16 Feb 2022 - 08:31, said:

Indeed, imagine the shouting if they say Masi made a mistake and Max is a tarnished Champion.

It's wiser to always keep ones fever dreams private, would be my advice.

[mcjohnson]

Fastcake, on 15 Feb 2022 - 21:02, said:

Perhaps it's better to consider an alternate scenario, where Latifi crashed a couple of laps earlier, leaving plenty of laps left on the board for the rules to be correctly applied and the race resumed with Hamilton ahead of Verstappen on old tyres with three laps to go. Many people would have been very angry over the outcome, but as it would have been done correctly according to the rules, the feeling would be one of awful luck rather than injustice.

In such a situation, Lewis would almost certainly have pitted. Lewis was blisteringly faster than Max all evening; Lewis on new softs vs Max on 14 laps Hards wouldn’t have been a contest over 3 laps.

[mcjohnson]

rockdude101, on 15 Feb 2022 - 23:16, said:

Not necessarily costing Max, but he illegitimately gave Lewis 25 points by not disqualifying Lewis at Silverstone.

He didn’t give Lewis 25 points at all; he had no role in the disciplinary proceedings. Lewis got a 10 second penalty from the stewards, as that is the going rate for causing a collision with mitigating circumstances.

[FortiFord]

He's not fit for the job, therefore i hope they find a replacement. 

 

 i'm sure he can make a career for himself on trash TV (Celeb Love Island Australia or something like that) with his new found fame. 

[Tenmantaylor]

I still don't get why people think someone like Masi is entitled to a living in a privileged position. If you or I are **** at your job you get sacked. Simple as.

What he did goes way beyond incompetence, its worthy of a full on corruption investigation the likes of which FIFA needed and the IOC needs.

This isnt tiddly winks, its the premier global motorsport with billions at stake in sponsorship, prize money and revenues.

It simply cannot afford to have its races run by an incompetent, easily influenced/someone who could be perceived as partial/potentially corrupt.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 16 February 2022 - 11:55.

[FullOppositeLock]

The last remarks are kind of funny considering a fair few Lewis fans were praising Masi earlier in the AD race thread for letting Lewis keep his place in lap one, which in itself was inconsistent with earlier decisions and evidence if it was needed, of incompetence rather than corruption.

[mcjohnson]

FullOppositeLock, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:24, said:

The last remarks are kind of funny considering a fair few Lewis fans were praising Masi earlier in the AD race thread for letting Lewis keep his place in lap one, which in itself was inconsistent with earlier decisions and evidence if it was needed, of incompetence rather than corruption.

It’s not inconsistent with earlier decisions or the evidence; the evidence was that Max took a line specifically to force Hamilton off. If you look at Max’s line on lap 2 - 58 in that corner you’ll see he never once repeats that line.

Max thought he could bully his way into the lead, having been beaten off the line.

[FullOppositeLock]

Are you telling me that in order to overtake another car sometimes a driver may have to take a less than optimal line through a corner? Consider my mind blown.

[mcjohnson]

FullOppositeLock, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:29, said:

Are you telling me that in order to overtake another car sometimes a driver may have to take a less than optimal line through a corner? Consider my mind blown.

No, what I’m telling you is that Max took a line that was intended to force Lewis off the track; this is why Lewis wasn’t asked to give the place back, but was asked to give back the advantage he’d gained by leaving the track.

The evidence is when they entered the braking zone, Max was still significantly behind Lewis. Indeed, when Lewis turns into the corner, taking the racing line, Max is still a full car length behind Lewis. It’s what is commonly referred to as a ‘dive bomb’, and it’s just one of Max’s specialties.

Edited by mcjohnson, 16 February 2022 - 12:43.

[FullOppositeLock]

mcjohnson, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:33, said:

No, what I’m telling you is that Max took a line that was intended to force Lewis off the track; this is why Lewis wasn’t asked to give the place back, but was asked to give back the advantage he’d gained by leaving the track.

 

Lewis kept the door wide open into turn 6, to which Max dived to the inside. At the apex of the corner Max was more than fully alongside, even in front by more than half a car. Max made the corner and comfortably kept to the track as it is defined. Lewis, instead of yielding the position, floored the accelerator, re-overtook Max and even created himself a gap large enough to not come under any pressure on the following straight. It was wholly inconsistent with the penalty Max received for a similar move the week before, Bahrain turn four in the opening race and many more. If the only way you can keep or win a place in a fight for position is to go off track you have to give the place back or face a penalty. That was the whole reasoning behind the uproar (that I agreed with) about Max not receiving a penalty in Brazil. I could be mistaken, but I thought you were one of those who liked your rules to be applied consistently?

[w00dy]

Tenmantaylor, on 16 Feb 2022 - 11:54, said:

I still don't get why people think someone like Masi is entitled to a living in a privileged position. If you or I are **** at your job you get sacked. Simple as.

What he did goes way beyond incompetence, its worthy of a full on corruption investigation the likes of which FIFA needed and the IOC needs.

This isnt tiddly winks, its the premier global motorsport with billions at stake in sponsorship, prize money and revenues.

It simply cannot afford to have its races run by an incompetent, easily influenced/someone who could be perceived as partial/potentially corrupt.

 

So far no one from the FIA said that Masi made an error. Hopefully the report will clear this up.

 

If he made an error, what was the error? is it such a big one to get fired for? Why? Because it may have affected the result? Are we looking at offences or outcomes? Is incorrectly applying 48.12 a terminable offense every time? Or just at the last race?

 

Race Directors don't get fired. The last guy may have made such an error that may have resulted in the death of a driver (Whiting-tractor-Bianchi) He didn't get fired. 6-7 years on, he is the standard.

 

If the report concludes that there was no human error (Masi made no mistake) then why do you fire/move him? Because one team wants it? How does the next guy work with authority if that can happen to him too?

Edited by w00dy, 16 February 2022 - 12:53.

[Tenmantaylor]

FullOppositeLock, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:24, said:

The last remarks are kind of funny considering a fair few Lewis fans were praising Masi earlier in the AD race thread for letting Lewis keep his place in lap one, which in itself was inconsistent with earlier decisions and evidence if it was needed, of incompetence rather than corruption.

 

Whoa whoa whoa. It WAS inconsistent with those previous wrong decisions. Don't get mixed up in the Masi-verse.

 

Viewed alone, Max pushed Lewis off on lap 1. That is not allowed. Only because Max didn't run himself off aswell as per Brazil when he was basically trying to take Lewis out is not something to proud of.

 

Coming back from a very wrong ruling to just a wrong one is not what the RD should be doing. Every decision should be right and open to scrutiny in isolation, not judged by previous failings.

 

Like saying twisting the knife isn't allowed but a little bit of stabbing is ok.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 16 February 2022 - 13:01.

[AnR]

Since nobody looks like they give any sympathy for Masi here is a note to him for 2022 or who ever takes over, don't ever read any internet forums after a decision, don't ever listen to carefully to the teams and seek to split the responsibility in the final races.

 

Some people here writes the same thing in every thread, perhaps time to sort where things are supposed to be expressed?

[RekF1]

Tenmantaylor, on 16 Feb 2022 - 11:54, said:

I still don't get why people think someone like Masi is entitled to a living in a privileged position. If you or I are **** at your job you get sacked. Simple as.
What he did goes way beyond incompetence, its worthy of a full on corruption investigation the likes of which FIFA needed and the IOC needs.
This isnt tiddly winks, its the premier global motorsport with billions at stake in sponsorship, prize money and revenues.
It simply cannot afford to have its races run by an incompetent, easily influenced/someone who could be perceived as partial/potentially corrupt.

On a similar note,I don't understand how a team principle is less accountable than a driver. The Silverstone weekend and the Horner response to racial abuse endured by Lewis. In any other high profile job you're done after that. Going back to Latifi, his new found fans seem more concerned than him.

[Tenmantaylor]

w00dy, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:52, said:

So far no one from the FIA said that Masi made an error. Hopefully the report will clear this up.

 

If he made an error, what was the error? is it such a big one to get fired for? Why? Because it may have affected the result? Are we looking at offences or outcomes? Is incorrectly applying 48.12 a terminable offense every time? Or just at the last race?

 

Race Directors don't get fired. The last guy may have made such an error that may have resulted in the death of a driver (Whiting-tractor-Bianchi) He didn't get fired. 6-7 years on, he is the standard.

 

If the report concludes that there was no human error (Masi made no mistake) then why do you fire/move him? Because one team wants it? How does the next guy work with authority if that can happen to him too?

 

Are you fricking kidding me? After all this time you think it's OK to make rules up when told to do so by one team to benefit their driver and seal him the title? I'm losing the ability of words.

 

Like the ref in the last minute of the world cup final, it's 0-0, a leg break tackle from one team happens in the box, then instantly giving the penalty kick to the opposing team instead. Trying my best to do a football analogy as so many still don't quite understand the magnitude of his failure to do his job:

 

1. Apply the rules

2. Apply the fricking rules

3. Don't break the rules

4. Don't make new rules

5. Don't instantly make up another rule after breaking 1 rule

 

FIA need to print that out and put in the RD box this season

[Tenmantaylor]

AnR, on 16 Feb 2022 - 13:01, said:

Since nobody looks like they give any sympathy for Masi here is a note to him for 2022 or who ever takes over, don't ever read any internet forums after a decision, don't ever listen to carefully to the teams and seek to split the responsibility in the final races.

 

Some people here writes the same thing in every thread, perhaps time to sort where things are supposed to be expressed?

 

If Masi followed the rules no one would have had a leg to stand compared to the criticism is duly receiving.

 

Try it.

 

The race ends under the safety as per the rules.

 

As a Max fan, critique Masi for that.

 

You can't.

[Huffer]

FullOppositeLock, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:24, said:

The last remarks are kind of funny considering a fair few Lewis fans were praising Masi earlier in the AD race thread for letting Lewis keep his place in lap one, which in itself was inconsistent with earlier decisions and evidence if it was needed, of incompetence rather than corruption.

 

Bringing up an incident that, as the rules were written, was perfectly fine and handled within those rules and comparing that to the rules being re-written on the fly; just smacks of somebody not having any sort of valid argument. 

Edited by Huffer, 16 February 2022 - 13:51.

[shure]

understeer, on 15 Feb 2022 - 11:13, said:

The only place I see FIA involvement is in governing F1 and other feeder series. F1 ceases to be a sport if they don't address AD issue. If so there is no need for FIA 

The Redbull , Masi & Stewards Collusion is corruption.

well maybe you should look at the FIA website then because it does a lot more than you think.

 

If you say F1 should leave the FIA that's one thing, although that's nowhere near as simple as you appear to think.  But dissolving an org the size of the FIA because of something that happened at one F1 race is perhaps just slightly unrealistic

[shure]

Tenmantaylor, on 16 Feb 2022 - 11:54, said:

I still don't get why people think someone like Masi is entitled to a living in a privileged position. If you or I are **** at your job you get sacked. Simple as.

What he did goes way beyond incompetence, its worthy of a full on corruption investigation the likes of which FIFA needed and the IOC needs.

This isnt tiddly winks, its the premier global motorsport with billions at stake in sponsorship, prize money and revenues.

It simply cannot afford to have its races run by an incompetent, easily influenced/someone who could be perceived as partial/potentially corrupt.

you keep banging the corruption drum but there's not a shred of evidence that there was any corruption involved.  Poor decision-making, coupled with an apparent susceptibility to outside influence and an inability to think clearly under pressure are all evidence of incompetence.  Saying what he did goes beyond that is not supported by anything outside of fevered imagination

[shure]

mcjohnson, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:27, said:

It’s not inconsistent with earlier decisions or the evidence; the evidence was that Max took a line specifically to force Hamilton off. If you look at Max’s line on lap 2 - 58 in that corner you’ll see he never once repeats that line.

Max thought he could bully his way into the lead, having been beaten off the line.

it's inconsistent because he didn't actually force Hamilton off: If Max could turn and make the corner, then so could Lewis have, but he chose instead to continue straight ahead rather than cede the position.  In the past people have waved the "yes but Hamilton made the corner so he gets the right to the place" argument, which was strangely missing when the she was on the other foot

[mcjohnson]

FullOppositeLock, on 16 Feb 2022 - 12:52, said:

Lewis kept the door wide open into turn 6, to which Max dived to the inside. At the apex of the corner Max was more than fully alongside, even in front by more than half a car. Max made the corner and comfortably kept to the track as it is defined. Lewis, instead of yielding the position, floored the accelerator, re-overtook Max and even created himself a gap large enough to not come under any pressure on the following straight. It was wholly inconsistent with the penalty Max received for a similar move the week before, Bahrain turn four in the opening race and many more. If the only way you can keep or win a place in a fight for position is to go off track you have to give the place back or face a penalty. That was the whole reasoning behind the uproar (that I agreed with) about Max not receiving a penalty in Brazil. I could be mistaken, but I thought you were one of those who liked your rules to be applied consistently?

Where Max is at the Apex is an irrelevance; it’s where Max is at the corner entry, by the regulations, that stipulates how much racing room he’s entitled to. At that point, Max was still fully behind Lewis.

Even if we apply your logic as relevant, that Max was alongside at the Apex, Lewis would still have been entitled to racing room on the outside; space which Max denied him, by cutting across the entire track.…. And Max didn’t make the corner comfortably at all, he virtually came to a standstill at the exit because of the line he took; something he only got away with because he had the safety net of Perez behind him.

It was one of the most blatant forcing off incidents of the season, and Max was duly rewarded.

[mcjohnson]

shure, on 16 Feb 2022 - 14:12, said:

it's inconsistent because he didn't actually force Hamilton off: If Max could turn and make the corner, then so could Lewis have, but he chose instead to continue straight ahead rather than cede the position. In the past people have waved the "yes but Hamilton made the corner so he gets the right to the place" argument, which was strangely missing when the she was on the other foot

Lewis couldn’t have made the corner because he was on the racing line, and already committed when Max dived up the inside; Max’s line cut straight across the racing line, and was still a full car length behind Lewis when Lewis was turning into the corner! Lewis had to continue straight; it was that or hit Max.

Edited by mcjohnson, 16 February 2022 - 14:21.

[Requiem84]

I see it works like this:

 

'Masi decision benefitting my driver' => GOOD decision, what are you talking about???

'Masi decesion disadvantaging my driver' => OUTRAGEOUS, corruption, incompetence, collusion, needs to be sacked TODAY

 

Personally, I think he made very significant mistakes in both directions. I don't know if we can fully blame it on him given the fundamental flaws in the way Race Direction has been run for a long time. 

 

Most drivers in any case seem still quite supportive of Masi, so perhaps our views are a bit too colored here.... 

[mcjohnson]

shure, on 16 Feb 2022 - 14:08, said:

you keep banging the corruption drum but there's not a shred of evidence that there was any corruption involved. Poor decision-making, coupled with an apparent susceptibility to outside influence and an inability to think clearly under pressure are all evidence of incompetence. Saying what he did goes beyond that is not supported by anything outside of fevered imagination

Red Bull got a 40 minute adjournment during the Mercedes protest to consider their defence. When they went back into meeting, now with Masi there, the Red Bull and RD stories were almost identical.

It would be interesting to know if Red Bull and the RD met during those 40 minutes.

I don’t think there was any collusion during the race; just a lot of hard lobbying by Red Bull in those laps under the SC. But whether there was any collusion after the race is still to be determined.

Edited by mcjohnson, 16 February 2022 - 14:24.

[AnR]

mcjohnson, on 16 Feb 2022 - 14:19, said:

Red Bull got 40 minutes during the Mercedes protest to consider their defence. When they went back into meeting, now with Masi there, the Red Bull and RD stories were almost identical.

It would be interesting to know if Red Bull and the RD met during those 40 minutes.

 

what did Red Bull have to defend? you are a bit overhyped about this to say the least

[TheFish]

AnR, on 16 Feb 2022 - 14:24, said:

what did Red Bull have to defend? you are a bit overhyped about this to say the least

They were defending Masi's actions in the stewards meeting.