F1SUPERFAN#1

Sauber Disqualification

11 posts in this topic

Do you think FIA was fair or unfair to penalize Sauber for the wing infraction by disqualifying both cars?

Are all the cars not thoroughly inspected before each race with after race inspections geared to reveal any possible changes made during the pitstops?

I feel sorry for Sergio Perez and Kamui Kobayashi who both performed admirably and are to be congratulated for their finishing in the top ten in the first F1 race of the season.

I don't think that FIA was fair in their disqualification of the two Sauber cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some rules are shades of grey and some rules are black and white. The majority of technical rules, you will find, are black and white, i.e. stating what you can and can't do, or how long or heavy or wide something can be, or how you can use it, etc (i.e. things that can be measured and observed easily). There is quite rightly no argument against an infringement to a rule which is black and white, even if the infringement is minor, unintentional and not beneficial (all are probably true in Sauber's case). Allowing such appeals when the stewards find such infringements would have a ridiculous effect, people would start designing out of the regulations knowing they could get away with it. If the sport is to go down that road the logical conclusion is: don't bother having any rules if you aren't going to follow them. As much as most people would like for Sauber to be excepted from the regulation in this instance, it would put the FIA in an unreasonable position if they did that. So the decision is fair in the wider sense and unfair, arguably, in a more specific sporting sense (if it didn't provide an advantage).

As for the checks they do, I read that certain aspects of the car are only checked at certain points of the weekend, such as at the end of the GP.

On the point of driver performances, if it's true that it doesn't add any unfair advantage, it doesn't actually take anything away from their two drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the detailed response. However, I feel that since no unfair advantage was gained by the "non-conforming" wing, the two drivers should be allowed to keep their points. Perez and Kobayashi should not have to lose valuable drivers' points, but Sauber probably should, as it is their responsibility to know the rules in every detail so they can adhere to them and avoid getting into this position again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the detailed response. However, I feel that since no unfair advantage was gained by the "non-conforming" wing, the two drivers should be allowed to keep their points. Perez and Kobayashi should not have to lose valuable drivers' points, but Sauber probably should, as it is their responsibility to know the rules in every detail so they can adhere to them and avoid getting into this position again.

Sorry for my previous reply.

I think the FIA did the right thing but I always feel they might have been magnanimous with a bigger team if the drivers involved were fighting for the Championship. Although, things might have changed in that respect in the FIA. First race and the car doesn't comply with the rules, no other choice for the FIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on what the infraction actually is I guess. Not like they are not allowed movable aero parts now is it?

However, ones mind does wander back to the second race of the season whereby Ferrari was excluded from the Malaysian GP for having barge boards that were 4mm too wide, as measured at the end of the race. Of course this was overturned once FIArrari got invloved :P

So it doesn't matter if its the first or last race...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on which team committed the so called infraction. If, for instance, this was Ferrari or Red Bull, we would have never heard of it. If it was Vettel or Hamilton fighting for the championship - ditto. However, this is "only" Sauber. So, no, it was not unfair per FIA policy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some rules are shades of grey and some rules are black and white. The majority of technical rules, you will find, are black and white, i.e. stating what you can and can't do, or how long or heavy or wide something can be, or how you can use it, etc (i.e. things that can be measured and observed easily). There is quite rightly no argument against an infringement to a rule which is black and white, even if the infringement is minor, unintentional and not beneficial (all are probably true in Sauber's case). Allowing such appeals when the stewards find such infringements would have a ridiculous effect, people would start designing out of the regulations knowing they could get away with it. If the sport is to go down that road the logical conclusion is: don't bother having any rules if you aren't going to follow them. As much as most people would like for Sauber to be excepted from the regulation in this instance, it would put the FIA in an unreasonable position if they did that. So the decision is fair in the wider sense and unfair, arguably, in a more specific sporting sense (if it didn't provide an advantage).

As for the checks they do, I read that certain aspects of the car are only checked at certain points of the weekend, such as at the end of the GP.

On the point of driver performances, if it's true that it doesn't add any unfair advantage, it doesn't actually take anything away from their two drivers.

That argument is false. They would still loose the majorty of the appeals and be disquallified.

Your logical conclusion relies on all appeals succeeding.

As for everything else - we agree. Sauber has no case here and they probably wouldn't appeal even if they could. They would know that it would be a waste of time.

Most technical rules are pretty clear - although I do remember some hoohaa about whether a slot is a slot or a hole or some such thing a couple of years ago. :eusa_think:

Anywho - shame the Saubers got punted, but it was the only decision that could be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair - yes, the rules are the rules.

Disappointing - very, Perez in particular drove brilliantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That argument is false. They would still loose the majorty of the appeals and be disquallified.

Your logical conclusion relies on all appeals succeeding.

As for everything else - we agree. Sauber has no case here and they probably wouldn't appeal even if they could. They would know that it would be a waste of time.

Most technical rules are pretty clear - although I do remember some hoohaa about whether a slot is a slot or a hole or some such thing a couple of years ago. :eusa_think:

Anywho - shame the Saubers got punted, but it was the only decision that could be made.

Sorry, my post was poorly worded. By 'allowing' I meant 'upholding' such appeals, as in those types of appeals being successful, my bad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe in this case will be fair to allow the drivers to keeps teh points and the team been penalize with teh points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now