1968 replies to this topic

[PassWind]

Isn't launch control just traction control but specifically at the start? So a form of traction control.

Both are for the purpose of keeping rotational force from breaking rear tire static friction.

[jcbc3]

So he is saying that 30% of the time his client gets an outright acquittal, and in the other 70% either his client is convicted/loses the case or there is a middling ruling that satisfies neither side?

 

Yes, except that it's only a few years he gets to 30% most years it's below.

[Sterzo]

Yes, except that it's only a few years he gets to 30% most years it's below.

Is he talking about criminal cases or civil ones, jcbc3? I'd imagine there's a difference in the readiness of lawyers to take on civil cases, based on the probability of winning, whereas defending criminal cases is a "must" and can be funded by legal aid.

[milestone 11]

Yes, except that it's only a few years he gets to 30% most years it's below.

We're talking of criminal defence? That being the case, 30% is optimistic. 

[Gravelngrass]

I don't anyone, on this thread or elsewhere, has cited a rule that was broken that, if it had been followed, would have resulted in Massa's automatically being gifted the WDC. One can dream up unlikely but not inconceivable scenarios in which he might have been gifted the title, but they are very different from a scenario in which the FIA were obliged to give him the title.

Ok, so just to be clearer: let’s say, for argument’s sake, someone would have found out about the on-purpose crash immediately or very soon after the race. What would have been the procedure? Was there anything like this contemplated in the rules (not exactly what to do if a knucklehead crashes on purpose but cheating by a team for example)? If there was, and it had been applied, what would have been the result of that race? Annulment? Partial points? Disqualification of cheating team only? And, if that happened, what would have been the outcome for Massa’s championship leaving everything else equal (so no butterfly effect).
Did Massa have an answer to these questions? Did anyone?

Edited by Gravelngrass, 16 March 2024 - 11:54.

[917k]

Ok, so just to be clearer: let’s say, for argument’s sake, someone would have found out about the on-purpose crash immediately or very soon after the race. What would have been the procedure? Was there anything like this contemplated in the rules (not exactly what to do if a knucklehead crashes on purpose but cheating by a team for example)? If there was, and it had been applied, what would have been the result of that race? Annulment? Partial points? Disqualification of cheating team only? And, if that happened, what would have been the outcome for Massa’s championship leaving everything else equal (so no butterfly effect).
Did Massa have an answer to these questions? Did anyone?

I don’t see why this would be treated any different than any other illegality. I would suspect that Alonzo would be DSQ and the team would be fined, banned and or sanctioned heavily. I certainly don’t see any scenario in which other racing positions are adjusted based on some sort of speculative outcome… That’s never been the case in Formula One. 

[jcbc3]

Is he talking about criminal cases or civil ones, jcbc3? I'd imagine there's a difference in the readiness of lawyers to take on civil cases, based on the probability of winning, whereas defending criminal cases is a "must" and can be funded by legal aid.

 

 

Yes, we are talking cases from traffic misdemeanour, to fraud to rape. He has not yet defended homicide to my knowledge, only prosecuted

 

We're talking of criminal defence? That being the case, 30% is optimistic. 

 

 

Yes, that's what I started out saying. 30% rarely and most often lower. He is court appointed for the heavier cases. Once you get 'a name', defendants ask for you specifically to be appointed.

[New Britain]

Ok, so just to be clearer: let’s say, for argument’s sake, someone would have found out about the on-purpose crash immediately or very soon after the race. What would have been the procedure? Was there anything like this contemplated in the rules (not exactly what to do if a knucklehead crashes on purpose but cheating by a team for example)? If there was, and it had been applied, what would have been the result of that race? Annulment? Partial points? Disqualification of cheating team only? And, if that happened, what would have been the outcome for Massa’s championship leaving everything else equal (so no butterfly effect).
Did Massa have an answer to these questions? Did anyone?

- There are long-established protocols for the use of safety cars.

- There are long-established penalties for drivers' cheating.

- There are long-established penalties for teams' cheating.

 

NONE of those protocols and penalties includes annulling the entire race.

[Gravelngrass]

- There are long-established protocols for the use of safety cars.
- There are long-established penalties for drivers' cheating.
- There are long-established penalties for teams' cheating.

NONE of those protocols and penalties includes annulling the entire race.

So, in your opinion, Massa was always clutching at straws?
Or is that precisely the intent of the whole lawsuit: to have the race results changed (not sure what scenarios would favor him) so that he gets the WDC? I mean, to me, anything else would make no sense at all. Iow, IMO money would be the lowest outcome they would be expecting.

Edited by Gravelngrass, 16 March 2024 - 14:42.

[PayasYouRace]

So, in your opinion, Massa was always clutching at straws?

Clutching at straws is a best case scenario for Felipe Baby.

[milestone 11]

Yeah, the last straw.

[New Britain]

So, in your opinion, Massa was always clutching at straws?
Or is that precisely the intent of the whole lawsuit: to have the race results changed (not sure what scenarios would favor him) so that he gets the WDC? I mean, to me, anything else would make no sense at all. Iow, IMO money would be the lowest outcome they would be expecting.

Although it is always possible that Massa could luck into getting a judge who is a fool (they do exist!) who rules in his favour, I think this is mainly an emotional exercise for him. Massa feels that he was the victim of injustice and most of all he wants a forum in which he can plead his case to the world.

Massa's case has so little intellectual merit that it is surprising that he would seriously argue it, but to him that is secondary to satisfying some emotional need.

[RoryFormula1]

Ok, so just to be clearer: let’s say, for argument’s sake, someone would have found out about the on-purpose crash immediately or very soon after the race. What would have been the procedure? Was there anything like this contemplated in the rules (not exactly what to do if a knucklehead crashes on purpose but cheating by a team for example)? If there was, and it had been applied, what would have been the result of that race? Annulment? Partial points? Disqualification of cheating team only? And, if that happened, what would have been the outcome for Massa’s championship leaving everything else equal (so no butterfly effect).
Did Massa have an answer to these questions? Did anyone?

They would have done exactly what has always been done if a team cheated/operated outside the rules. They would have penalized that team or disqualified that team from the results. See Aston Martin at Hungary, Mercedes/Ferrari at COTA, Mercedes at Brazil, BAR with their extra fuel tank, McLaren 2007, etc.

The notion that Bernie and Co would have done something outside of their enumerated powers doesn’t really help Massa in my opinion. What it does do is make me really want to get Bernie under oath. If I were a litigator I’d want to know what he meant exactly and if he is aware of any other instances in which they (Bernie, Max, etc.) took an action outside of the rulebook.

Edited by RoryFormula1, 16 March 2024 - 19:07.

[P123]

They would have done exactly what has always been done if a team cheated/operated outside the rules. They would have penalized that team or disqualified that team from the results.

The notion that Bernie and Co would have done something outside of their enumerated powers doesn’t really help Massa in my opinion. What it does do is make me really want to get Bernie under oath. If I were a litigator I’d want to know what he meant exactly and if he is aware of any other instances in which they (Bernie, Max, etc.) took an action outside of the rulebook.

 

I'd suggest that if Bernie & Co knew all about it, as he said, that the motivation behind not acting would have been that disqualification, as is the norm, would have extended Hamilton's championship advantage into the final round.  And we know that the FIA really didn't want to make anything easier for McLaren.

[Counterbalance]

I'd suggest that if Bernie & Co knew all about it, as he said, that the motivation behind not acting would have been that disqualification, as is the norm, would have extended Hamilton's championship advantage into the final round. And we know that the FIA really didn't want to make anything easier for McLaren.

Good point. If the FIA could have done anything further to harm McLaren (like annulling a race for example), that would have been enough to whip Max Mosley into a frenzy!

[Maustinsj]

Good point. If the FIA could have done anything further to harm McLaren (like annulling a race for example), that would have been enough to whip Max Mosley into a frenzy!

I see what you did there.

[PayasYouRace]

They would have done exactly what has always been done if a team cheated/operated outside the rules. They would have penalized that team or disqualified that team from the results. See Aston Martin at Hungary, Mercedes/Ferrari at COTA, Mercedes at Brazil, BAR with their extra fuel tank, McLaren 2007, etc.

The notion that Bernie and Co would have done something outside of their enumerated powers doesn’t really help Massa in my opinion. What it does do is make me really want to get Bernie under oath. If I were a litigator I’d want to know what he meant exactly and if he is aware of any other instances in which they (Bernie, Max, etc.) took an action outside of the rulebook.

I think Bernie is at a stage that he just wouldn’t care anymore. Getting him “under oath” won’t change what comes out of his mouth.

[pdac]

I think Bernie is at a stage that he just wouldn’t care anymore. Getting him “under oath” won’t change what comes out of his mouth.

 

Did it ever?

[RoryFormula1]

I think Bernie is at a stage that he just wouldn’t care anymore. Getting him “under oath” won’t change what comes out of his mouth.

Maybe but I’m sure he cares about his estate. If he admits that he and his crew did things outside of the rules then it could open himself/his estate up to civil suits and help those that their decisions wronged against the FIA.

Edited by RoryFormula1, 17 March 2024 - 16:23.