Lee
FIA STRIKES AGAIN!

Clive, you will never get to see the transcript of the stewards interviews as it most probably shows that hamilton and mclaren did not purposefully decieve the stewards. Either that or it shows that Alan Donnelly was again conducting the interviews without the stewards present (as in spa). It seems like the FIA are conducting a carefully engineered media campaign against hamilton as they have released his transcripted words over the radio (which is pretty inconclusive) and the transcripts of his media interviews (which have absolutely nothing to do with the stewards enquiry). Yet the most obvious evidence is that of the stewards interviews which is conspicous in its absence.

There is also talk of an attempt to ban him form the championship altogether! Which would be the event that ends my support of F1. My dad is also thinking of selling his British GP tickets if this happens as he will want nothing more to do with F1.

What seems like an innocent missunderstanding by Toyota, Trulli, Mclaren and Hamilton which could so easily have been sorted out during the race has been turned into another farce by the FIA.

Having seen the footage from Trullis onboard camera it is quite clear that he does not wait long to make sure that hamilton really does have a problem before passing him, it also does not seem as if hamilton slows down significantly either. Surely if trulli was going to pass due to a technical problem with hamiltons car he would have waited at least 10 seconds or so rather than the almost instant pass he makes.

Toyota then order Trulli to slow to alow Hamilton to re-pass, but hamilton does what trulli should have done and waits behind due to the race being under yellow flag conditions. Whether Hamilton lied or not at the hearing, it does not change the fact that Trulli passed him under yellow flag conditions when he also did not wait (in my opinion) long enough to make sure that hamiltons slowing was indeed a techinal problem.

It is also debateable whether Toyota should have been racing at all as they were clearly in breach of the rules during qualifying. (You can imagine the FIAs reaction if mclaren had an illegal car during qualifying).

There were only 2 fair outcomes of the Trulli Hamilton incident and they were to either keep the result as it stood after they crossed the line or to swap hamilton and Trullis places after the race.

To be quite honest I do not see what difference the team orders make in all this. If the stewards think that Trulli passed hamilton without fully checking that his car was not malfunctioning then that is all that is important. If it looked to the stewards as if hamilton was having a problem then I am sure they would have initially sided with Trulli.

The Radio transcript does appear to be very short but it also shows how confused both the team and hamilton were about the whole situation. This in itself speaks volumes about the state of F1.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Basically, I agree with you, Lee, but I'm fed up with making an assessment of a situation and then new evidence turning up that alters our perspective. The FIA has supplied evidence it feels is relevant and says that both McLaren's representative and Hamilton maintained in the hearing that the team had not ordered Lewis to let Trulli by. The radio transmission indicates that this is not so. Before accepting what the stewards maintain, however, I want to see whether the McLaren boys really did make the alleged statements or whether it is just the stewards' take on the matter.

Then there is the matter of Hamilton slowing down and Whitmarsh's statement that the telemetry shows otherwise. There is still so much unknown that it is hardly worth arguing over. Too many things do not add up...
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Lee
Clive,

I agree, there are far to many things that do not add up here.

There are no winners in this case and one big looser, F1 istelf.

And this is not even taking into consideration the fact that the result is still not confirmed and that 5 of the top 8 drivers could still yet be disqualified!
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
You know, Lee, the Oz GP was a really great race. What a pity that so many quibbles, outcries and imponderables have combined to ruin our memory of it. Something has to be wrong somewhere.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Lee
Exaclty like spa........
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Don't remind me.

Like I said, nice weather we're having... ;)
Date Added: 02/04/2009

who cares
Who cares? All that matters is that Trulli got his rightful place back after Lewis slowed down to 15mph, which has the same effect as going off the track.

Oh and on top of that, either lewis or his team lied.

I find its a pretty simple concept to grasp and Im glad that trulli got his rightful place back.

I think the FIA could have caused a lot less shit by simply moving hammie into 4th, and trulli 3rd.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Lee
@who cares

Although there is no evidence so far that hamilton or mclaren have lied. Also from the tv evidence I have seen, hamilton did not slow down much at all and this ties with what mclaren are saying about their telemetry.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

verasaki
great photo. and it just dawned on me what the new tires remind me of. my father had an old desoto that had whitewall tires and anytime he had to buy a new tire, the white had that wierd green tinge to it until it was washed off.

and it's thursday. you aren't supposed to post anyway.

all i can say is that a comment on the weather is probably what every post race interview with anyone besides the guy who sweeps out the garage will be all about. so we better get used to it.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Who Cares: If only life were that simple. Since we have come to the stage of transcripts, where is the transcript of the meeting in which McLaren misled the stewards? We still don't have all the evidence.

Unfortunately, the record of the FIA in previous disputes has destroyed trust in what they say. Read the transcripts of the so-called spygate hearings, for instance.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Vera: Yes, I thought the photo might be a pleasant distraction from the news today. Great to know that even the tires led your thoughts to happier times.

It's Thursday, yes, but I felt obligated to say something in view of all that was happening. So I said something that was nothing. ;)
Date Added: 02/04/2009

who cares
So you guys think its a big conspiracy against lewis.

Yes well Im sure they would put all they have at stake simply to spite hammie...

Lemme go ask my wife for the transcript of the convo we had during dinner quick in case some one wants to see it.

At the end of the day, its the FIA and Maclarens business and not ours.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
No conspiracy, Who Cares - just a general mistrust of the FIA's version of events. But you're right about it being McLaren's and the FIA's business. Between the two of them, they're making a mockery of the sport.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

marc
Clive: you are right. It was a great race! Brawn GP 1-2, Kubica vs Vettel, and (aside from this situation) Hamilton's drive was incredible. 3rd or 4th is a wonderful finish from his qualifying position.

I'd watch it again. There is nothing better than a good dice on the circuit. That's what I tune in for.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Right on, Marc - you and me, both!
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Nick Goodspeed
I wonder when the roller derby season begins?
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Lee
@Who cares,

What exactly would the FIA be putting at stake to spite hamilton? They have no credibility left after last season and they have slipped even further in to farce with the diffuser row which could and should have been sorted out before the season started.

However ask yourself why McLaren would risk everything by purposefully lying about something that they knew could easily be proved by the stewards over 1 point on the first race of the season? Especially considering that they are fully aware that the FIA are just looking for somethig to jump on them for.

Also is it not in the interests of the FIA to release the transcripts of the steward interviews if they do conclusively prove that Hamilton and McLaren deceived the stewards? What harm would this cause the FIA? They choose to release transcripts of the radio transmissions and transcripts of lewis' media interviews but not the one thing that proves either way that they lied! Does that not seem even a little strange?

And you are wrong about it being the business of McLaren and the FIA. There is one group of people that are more important than any other and it is the fans, without fans there would be no sponsors which in turn would mean no F1!

And to with Ferrari supporter throughout the FIA, (Moselys' father was great friends with enzo, his deputy is a former ferrari team principle, his stewards advisor ran the PR for ferrari for some years (yep great qualification for a stewards advisor i know) and there are ex ferrari people on the FIA board of appeals). Ferrari are also the only team to be on the FIA payroll (a deal done to make sure Ferrari stayed in f1 some years ago). Why on earth should anyone take what the FIA tell us as fact?

The conspiracy would easily be put to bed with the release of the transcripts from the stewards enquiry.
Date Added: 02/04/2009

Clive
Nick: Had enough, hey? Hang in there, maybe it gets better later on...
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Steven Roy
This is a complete farce. If you look at the whole safety car period there was one incident that should have been considered for a penalty. Trulli lost control of his car under yellows and went off the track. That is a massively serious breach of safety protocols.

The FIA have access to the ECUs so they know who slowed when. The stewards should have looked at this irrefutable date before making a decision. The FIA have access to all radio transmissions. The stewards should have listened to this irrefutable evidence before making a decision.

Both teams contacted Charlie Whiting to ask who should be third and who should be fourth. Despite the fact that the race ran under yellows to the end Charlie never replied. Had he got back to them none of the nonsense since would have happened.

I keep reading that the right guy has third place back. No he doesn't. He threw his car off the road under yellow flags so should have been penalised.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Number 38
@ Steven Roy above:

You feel Trulli should be penalized for his transgresions.
How do you feel about Hamiltons (MBE) lies, fibs, mis-leading statements or all the above? Worthy of any penalty or does he just escape free?

And a foot note for our favorite scribe, he came up with the most foolish theory ever, "Trulli tried to EVADE penalty...."
I laughed for nearly an hour, it was the best thing I'd read in a week. Ah! That's okay, he's a GREAT writer, a FRIEND and FORGIVEN !!!!!!
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Pink Peril
Lee, good response.

Makes me wonder if Lewis would have been disqualified and reduced Macca's points to zero if Ferrari weren't already last on the list...

So, how about that weather?
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Nick Goodspeed
What McLaren and Hamilton say to each, truthful or not, is not what car racing is about. These buffoons, Mosley and Ecclestone believe they are in a position to police ethics, when nothing could be farther from the truth. How long before they begin disqualifying drivers and teams for soiled underwear or unholy thoughts. This is AUTO racing. The rules are there to define the autos and to keep people from being hurt. Not to judge sinful intent or point the finger. Teams lie and mislead. They've been doing this since the first race. Who said what is not the question. Who the hell Mosley and his yes men think they are is.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Mr Soap
Given a choice between a team who knows their radio, telemetry and visuals are recorded* lying in face of that for one point, and the FIA who know they can get away with pretty much anything lying for any one of a host of reasons, I know which I'd think most likely.

Or alternatively it could just have been a failure in communication**, and the stewards having to provide a distraction from their own incompetance, and not being able to backtrack.

* - and indeed whos driver assumed that the media had already heard the radio, and that nothing was untoward.

** - If Hamilton assumed that the media heard what was going on, he probably made the same assumption with the stewards.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Oops, Steven Roy meets Number 38. No, wait a minute - they both frequent the same forum that I do and haven't hacked each other to pieces yet. Maybe it's safe to stand in between them after all. ;)

Steven: Not sure that falling off the circuit during a yellow flag period is a penalisable offence.

Number 38: Steven, like myself, refuses to believe the stewards' version of the hearing until he sees the transcript - the one document that would prove McLaren were lying.

Trulli made up the "car with a problem" excuse after the event - no mention of it in the recording of the Toyota radio transmission. Trulli just tells them he has re-passed Hamilton and then slowed down but Hamilton hasn't taken the offer.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Peril: Something else to ponder: would the stewards have ignored Hamilton's pass on Trulli while he was off circuit if Hamilton had not subsequently let Trulli through? Guess we'll never know... :D
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Nick: I considered the ethical argument but decided it was probably giving the stewards too much credit. Let them release the hearing transcript before we accept their version of McLaren's answers to questions. At that point it might be worth looking at the ethical issue.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Mr Soap: I will say this: if things are exactly as the stewards say, the McLaren team are unbelievably stupid for lying to the stewards after having told the truth to the press. That is what just does not add up.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Nick Goodspeed
I'm beginning to believe F1 and Coronation Street have the same writers. People love repugnant displays of unbelievably hateful characters.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
I was thinking today about how like a soap opera F1 has become - or perhaps a detective series. And this is supposed to be a sport, not life and death.

But it's the money, isn't it? That's what makes all the drama worth it for the players...
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Daniel
Well, this came as a surprise, ya know the whole Hamilton-Trulli incident.

As a McMerc fan, this is subject is very annoying and poignant, and I've always felt as if the FIA is out to get McLaren. I thought that Lewis did the right thing by allowing Trulli back in front during the safety car period, as it's supposed to happen because there's been a freaking INCIDENT on the track. I might be paranoid, but I believe that these gray areas exist in the rules so that the FIA can do as they please depending on the constructor that has "violated" these rules.

Mosley and Ecclestone disgust me.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Alianora La Canta
I get the impression that this was a communication problem all round.

Firstly, Trulli has a communication problem in not telling his pit crew what he is going to do. Not a crime, but it didn't help the ensuing confusion either.

Next, McLaren and Hamilton have an argument (judging from the transcript) over whether Trulli should be let through or not. It is the disputatious nature of the exchange which tells me this is not an order.

But the signs of argument are missed here; the stewards' subsequent conclusion that an order was given would be a logical manner of error to make if that misunderstanding. Hamilton may have slowed, but that was due to confusion rather than instructions.

So this tells me that it is now possible to be disqualified for communication failure. This has serious implications for all competitors in future, not just Hamilton or McLaren.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

aracerdude
Of course the obvious irony here is.....

Hamilton won last years title by passing a Toyota on the last turn of the last race of 2008.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Lee
@Aracerdude,

And Toyota were not disqualified for cheating in practice!

And may yet be disqualified for running a diffuser which has been initially passed as legal.

F1 is a mess of inconsistency.

@Steven Roy,

I think it is a little unfair to claim that Trulli should be punished for going off course. The breaks and tryes were getting very cool at that point and it was not necessarily wreckless driving that caused the off. Indeed if it was not for the ridiculous farce he would have punished himself by loosing a place.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Who cares?
"McLaren confirms Ryan's suspension" - Still think FIA are to blame guys?
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Alianora La Canta
Yes. This isn't the first time McLaren have done a scapegoating technique to avoid unwarranted wrath and given the way the FIA are, it is unlikely to be the last.

If McLaren really believed Ryan to be at definite fault, then they wouldn't be suspending him, they'd be dismissing him. This way they can make it appear that they are taking action, give everyone chance to cool down and then reinstate him.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

tapyarg
My initial reaction was "oh no, another farcical decision by the powers that be!". But, having seen that McLaren has now suspended Ryan I can only think that they acted inappropriately. This saddens me as I think the punishment they get from doing this is probably far more deserved than the ridiculous penalty's of last year and the year before.

However it has happened it was a bad decision by the team and I can only think harms McLaren's & Hamilton's reputation. People will only remember the controversy and forget what an awesome drive it was from him in Melbourne. What a shame.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Lee
@Who cares,

Yes I still think the FIA are hiding something. We do not know the full details regarding the suspension. It could easily be that he was judged by Mclaren to have made a mistake which led to the allegations. This however does not mean he purposefully deceived the stewards. Until the FIA release the details of what was said or Mclaren confirm exactly why Ryan was suspended I will remain suspisious of why the FIA have not released the deffinitive evidence. Again, why would Ryan have intentionally deceived the stewards about an issue which leads to 1 point? An issue where he would have been fully aware of the fact that the radio transmissions and telemetry data are available to the stewards. It still does not add up.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Lee
*suspicious

One day I will learn to proof read before clicking submit........
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Daniel: Well, no doubt you've read the news this morning and it looks as if the stewards were right. I can only hope that the matter goes no further, instead of the nonsense about taking it to the WMSC.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Alianora: Seems it was a little more straightforward than that, Ali. McLaren, or some of its employees at least, really are stupid.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Aracer: Yes, bitter irony indeed. Does that mean Trulli will be champion this year thanks to the points he gained, lost and then regained in Melbourne?
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Who Cares: Okay, you win. McLaren is a much more stupid team than I imagined possible.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Alianora: I wouldn't be so sure. Whitmarsh's statement seems almost like a goodbye to Ryan. And, judging by McLaren's apparently poor record of employing sensible people, it would be a good lesson to the others if his suspension were made permanent. The team is being severely damaged by the actions of a few idiots.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Tapyarg: I agree with you totally. A stupid mistake that has cost the team much more than a few points.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Lee: Unfortunately, I think the short answer to your question is, "Because he's an idiot." And Hamilton was a fool to accept what he said and back it up.

Obviously, the stewards have handled everything badly in not inspecting the telemetry and radio data before penalising Trulli but that is no excuse for the stupidity of lying about the instructions to Hamilton. McLaren need to get their priorities right (might write a post about that today).
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Lee
Clive,

I agree, however I am of the opinion that Hamilton himself was ledt with few options. Once Ryan told hime to not mention the radio converstion he had to go along with it due the the fact that he had no time to discuss it with whitmarsh. If they had gone in there and Ryan said one thing and Hamilton another then it would have also been a mess. Very stupid indeed from Ryan, but then this is a man who was probably expecting a bashing from the FIA and made a very bad judgement call in panic.

I still have no idea why Trulli was given his place back (even though I think it was a harsh penalty in the first place) as the Mclaren lie has nothing to do with the fact that Trulli overtook during a yellow flag while there was no significant sign that Hamiltons car was having problems. It also seems that as he went past hamilton Trulli himself was unsure of if he had passed correctly as he imediately slowed to let hamilton re-pass.

Also I think a DQ for hamilton is the wrong decision as the lies were not a racing incident and should be punished with a heavy fine or a grid penalty at the next race.

I also can not understand why this lie was any worse than Toyota running an illegal car during qualifying (for which they received a similar penalty to that of other cars that had to replace broken gearboxes).
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Nick Goodspeed
Big brother is watching!! I still fail to see the relevance of words spoken to and from a driver. The analysis of motivation shouldn't be a factor in determining if track behaviour is legal or not! This will only lead to teams developing code words for questionable acts. This type of governance is fascism. Once a system such as this has found it's way into an origination it is extremely difficult to rid it. Mosley may go but a new dictator will take his place and dictate the same. The only way to cure the problem is to begin outside the FIA and F1 anew.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
I agree that Lewis was put in a difficult position and made the wrong decision in the heat of the moment. He is a company man and would have felt the pressure to conform with Ryan's lie, therefore. Hopefully, he will learn from this that even the company cannot demand that you abandon truth just because it suits.

Disqualification was correct, I think, because the lie had affected another competitor. The stewards and FIA are in a huff that anyone would dare to lie to them but that is really no big deal - they have been known to lie themselves. It is the sordid attempt to influence the stewards' decision that needs punishing.

It was worse than Toyota's flexible wing because there was no provable intent involved and because the team were able to change it before the race. Had they raced with the wing and then been caught out, I am sure they would have been disqualified.

Having said which, the matter should end now. The team has suffered in innumerable ways from the offence and there is no need to prolong the agony into WMSC hearings and the like.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
Nick: Sure, the stewards were incompetent in not examining all the evidence before making their decision. To penalise a competitor on the assurances of another is obviously unfair. But the fact remains that Ryan and Hamilton told the stewards a silly lie in an attempt to hang on to a single extra point. That deserves punishment for stupidity alone.

Yes, the FIA is a mess and no one knows what they are and are not allowed to do. That should not encourage a team to depart from high standards, however. In fact, it is only by being squeaky clean that the teams can show up the governing body for the corrupt organisation it is.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Lee
Clive,

I disagree that the lies had any impact at all on trulli. It did not matter one bit that Maclaren had told lewis to let trulli past. What was important is that the stewards decided that Hamiltons car did not look like it was in trouble and that trulli passed regardless.

Also I think that the Toyota wing incident did affect the race. It was during qualifying and therfore they potentially took the places of others in q2 and q3. Given the chance of more qualifying laps other drives may have improved their placings. As qualifying has a direct impact on the race I believe that cheating in qualifying is one and the same as cheating during the race. Also if they must have had another wing which was rigid with them incase they were found out (as I can't believe that they managed to make the original rigid without a redesign or without affecting the aerodynamics of the wing). Whether they were intent on cheating or whether it they were just aware that they may have been pushing the rules a bit far I do not know, but it seems as if they knew they may become unstuck with the wing.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Clive
We don't actually know what the stewards would have decided had McLaren admitted that they told Hamilton to let Trulli through. It is quite possible that they would have still penalized the Toyota driver and that would have been that. But the stewards must have seen some relevance in the McLaren radio messages or they would not have asked the question. It might have been the deciding factor in their deliberations - we just don't know.

As for the wing affecting the race, yes it did - Toyota were sent to the back of the grid. But the matter of squeezing others out of Q2 and Q3 is reaching a bit, Lee. It's another of those "maybe, maybe not" questions that never gets answered. Judging by their race pace, the Toyotas' performance was not altered significantly by the flexi-wings.

I don't know how they changed the wing to make it acceptable. It could have been done merely by inserting spacers to keep the wing elements apart or maybe they turned the wing control dial in the driver's cockpit to maximum stiffness (joking!), who can say? You'd have a job to prove that it was all intentional, however (unless they really do have a dial like that!).
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Steven Roy
I find the whole situation very odd. Apparently stewards meetings are not minuted. So the Malaysian stewards have reviewed the decision of the Australian stewards with no hard evidence of what was said in Australia as there were no minutes taken.

McLaren clearly did not give Hamilton an instruction. His race engineer and him had a discussion/argument about what to do. The stewards assume that everyone involved is somehow a cohesive whole as opposed to many disparate people some of whom may not even have been listening to the radio traffic.

Everyone watching the world feed knew that Lewis had said he had slowed to let Trulli past so it does not seem to be the greatest stretch of the imagination for him to believe the stewards had heard that as well.

Why do the stewards insist on interviewing drivers when they have irrefutable evidence available to them? Listen to the radio traffic and read the ECU data.

McLaren telling lies to the stewards is stupid if it was pre-meditated but it does not change the fundamentals of what happened on the track. Both teams were confused about who should be where and both contacted race control repeatedly for clarification. Race control kept their heads down and didn't get involved.

Trulli leaving the circuit under yellow flags is a serious issue. Drivers in the past who have lost control especially near the scene of an accident have been penalised.

Also on a similar subject. Why does Allan Donnelly want to meet with Sebastian Vettel to explain the reasons for his penalty in Melbourne? Should that not have been done last week? Has this ever happened before? THe whole situation is plain odd.
Date Added: 03/04/2009

Nick Goodspeed
Clive: I must disagree. The stewards are not magistrates. What happened on track, did the drivers abide by the rules, and was anything dangerous are the questions at hand. The punishment reeks of righteous indignation, that somebody would dare say something that isn't absolutely true to the all powerful stewards. The stewards and the FIA have betrayed the trust of the teams repeatedly, therefore no longer can expect cooperative attitudes. Once again they (FIA) are making ad libbing as they go. I doubt if there are any rules pertaining to cross examination and how precise versions from the cockpit and sidelines must be. If someone is conversing with me when I'm pushing an extremely fast and powerful car at 10/10ths, there is no way they can expect me to remember what I've said 5 minutes after, let alone hours.
Date Added: 04/04/2009

Alianora La Canta
The protest deposit system was designed to prevent false or frivolous protests. Maybe it would help if teams were asked to deposit a point before protesting instead of the current €2000 (returnable if the protest succeeded)?
Date Added: 04/04/2009

Clive
Ooh, a whole bunch of comments I forgot to answer. Let's have a go now.

Nick: Not sure quite what you disagree with. I agree with what you say but this is the FIA we're talking about. Remember the Renault hearing two years ago when Max effectively told us that Renault got off scot free because they told the truth from the outset (not true, in fact, but heyho, Max had to say something) whereas McLaren had lied and tried to cover things up (not that Max had proved they lied but he thought he had).

So McLaren were fined 100 million dollars for lying to the FIA. That must be one mighty big sin!
Date Added: 04/04/2009

Clive
Steven: Agreed. As for Donnelly, I guess he is allowed to stick his nose in anywhere because he is Max's minion. To me, it means that the FIA knows full well that the stewards penalized Vettel unfairly but, in view of everything else that was going on, they were not prepared to admit they were wrong (might detract from the general perception of McLaren's wrongdoing). So Donnelly was sent out to cobble together some sort of rationale for the penalty and then feed it to poor Vettel. I dread to think what utter nonsense was spouted.

Note that nothing has been released in support of Vettel's penalty whereas we get just about everything in McLaren's case.
Date Added: 04/04/2009

Clive
Alianora: Not sure that would help. Later in the year some teams will have plenty of points to spend but others might have very few. They are very precious to the lesser teams. Seems a bit unfair to me.
Date Added: 04/04/2009

Alianora La Canta
At the moment some teams are more likely to have a spare €2000 than others. And if the point was returned upon the protest being successful, then it need not be a disadvantage to the small team with a genuine greivance.

Of course, this will only work if the FIA starts being sensible in its judgements, but a governing body that ignores its own regulations (as happened again today) cannot be handled in a fair and equitable manner no matter what anyone tries.
Date Added: 05/04/2009