Ferrari's engine furore

[mario]

So, with the FIA having spent several months investigating Ferrari's power unit, the FIA quietly announced on the final day of testing that they had come to a confidential settlement with Ferrari over their investigation.

If the FIA seemed to hope that might dampen things down, it seems that their statement could not have been more calculated to blow things apart. Having heard the angry complaints from teams that wanted the FIA to explain whether Ferrari was or wasn't in a legal configuration in 2019 - something the FIA's statement left unanswered - the seven non-Ferrari powered teams have now issued a joint statement demanding "full and proper disclosure" from the FIA on their investigation, with the implied threat of legal action if they do not provide further clarification.

It would seem that we are potentially going to face a rather interesting situation in Australia when the teams show up there - I can imagine that there is going to be little talk of anything else but this affair.

[yannicksamlad]

On the one hand the FIA has some transparency obligation; it must be seen to be policing the rules properly.

On the other hand here it seems the FIA didnt feel able to rule that there was any breach of the regulations , there was no penalty to impose and so revealing to the word the details of something they weren't classifying as 'illegal' isn't a fair thing to do ( giving away intellectual property) .

There are plenty of disagreements as to interpretation of rules/laws/contracts that the parties feel unable to take to court as they're too unsure of the outcome but they decide can be resolved by agreeing a way forward ( as appears here) . The question we want to know is whether and how the FIA decided something was 'wrong' or not , and if they thought it was 'wrong' , was their decision not to force the issue justifiable. I suppose we want to make those judgments ourselves, and want all the details!
Let's see what leaks out

[mario]

On the one hand the FIA has some transparency obligation; it must be seen to be policing the rules properly.

On the other hand here it seems the FIA didnt feel able to rule that there was any breach of the regulations , there was no penalty to impose and so revealing to the word the details of something they weren't classifying as 'illegal' isn't a fair thing to do ( giving away intellectual property) .

There are plenty of disagreements as to interpretation of rules/laws/contracts that the parties feel unable to take to court as they're too unsure of the outcome but they decide can be resolved by agreeing a way forward ( as appears here) . The question we want to know is whether and how the FIA decided something was 'wrong' or not , and if they thought it was 'wrong' , was their decision not to force the issue justifiable. I suppose we want to make those judgments ourselves, and want all the details!
Let's see what leaks out

Well, we've now got the FIA's response to the initial challenge from the other teams, which was to state that they were not fully satisfied that Ferrari's engine was always operating in a legal configuration, but because they could not provide "the unequivocal evidence of a breach", the FIA chose to adopt a negotiated settlement with Ferrari instead.

I suspect this is still going to rumble on until Australia, and probably some time beyond it - Marko has already been suggesting that Horner should demand the additional $24 million in prize money that Red Bull would have earned if they had finished in 2nd place in the WCC instead of Ferrari.

[razta]

Enjoy...

https://captiongenerator.com/1691562/Hi ... -statement

Steiner - Not Felix Steiner.. but Guenther.. cos you know, he's the "mole" in this..

[Pacific Edge]

Enjoy...

https://captiongenerator.com/1691562/Hi ... -statement

Steiner - Not Felix Steiner.. but Guenther.. cos you know, he's the "mole" in this..

That was funny, thanks for sharing it. Noticed something there, the word "failure" has an F, I, and A