Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Renault win appeal
Topic Started: Aug 17 2009, 04:09 PM (580 Views)
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
Breaking news from Auntie Beeb is that Renault won the appeal. Hardly a shocker when it would be commercial suicide for F1 to not have him there......

<rolleyes>
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJHSaints
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I think it would have been harsh to ban them because of an honest mistake, anyway. A good talking to and a reasonable fine would have been sufficient, in my view, even in light of Massa's and Surtees's accidents.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
True, but it would have been bloody funny to listen too/see Flav's reaction!

The hardest part would be proving the team knowingly let him got when the wheel wasn't attached. Perhaps it's time for mulitple wheel nuts if they are that concerned?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
Renault will instead be fined a huge ( <sarcasm> ) £30K, which is approximately the same as the bill for Flavio's aftershave for the weekend, and was the same trivial amount that Red Bull were fined for Vettel driving around on three and a half wheels at Melbourne.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
Just thinking on the maths..... £30K instead of a race ban. McLaren got £500K for Spygate instead of Max's favoured year ban, and 500/30 = just under 17, so presumably you get a 10% discount for a whole season. I wonder if there's a tarriff somewhere for these things....?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Norbert,Aug 17 2009
04:26 PM
Just thinking on the maths..... £30K instead of a race ban. McLaren got £500K for Spygate instead of Max's favoured year ban, and 500/30 = just under 17, so presumably you get a 10% discount for a whole season. I wonder if there's a tarriff somewhere for these things....?

£500K for spygate? I think you will find it was £50M, reducing to about £20Mish after deductions of prize money (better not to give out the prize money first only to collect it back).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
Ah, maybe it was! Still, perhaps there's a surcharge for chrome plating?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
timmadigan
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Expected since MS isn't racing this weekend. I see Bernie's hand in this since they need someone to draw the fans and that's either Alonso or MS.

But I still feel the initial decision was the right one. It was a stupid and dangerous thing to do and after the proceeding 7 days, it should have been dealt with harshly. After a fatal and near-fatal incident, every team should have been doublely cautious in the name of racing, if not anything else. Renault's actions were beyond excusable for the sport as a whole - if the tire had come off and injured another driver, they would have been charged criminally and FIA would have been dragged in with them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flood1
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie. You guys do not seem to understand the business of F1. The FOM/CVC fees, the TV fees, the sponsor fees do not have anything to do with race attendence. Those are contractural fees agreed long ago and cannot be changed or altered, and are not in anyway tied to attendance. Bernie, CVC, and everyone involved get their money regardless of the people in the seats.

Only the local promoter of the event suffers from ticket sales, and the food vendors, etc.

It is true that in the long term it may erode the promoter's will to continue to host an event, and that may reduce Bernie's take in the long run. But that is many contract years down the line.

Bernie/CVC does not directly make a penny off of event attendance. Nor do the FIA.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Iberiafromoz
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The appeal decision was correct, only in the sense that the drivers should race and regardless of tickets sales potential. I feel if it was Brazil or another GP the same decision would and should have been taken.

However Renault should have been hit a bit harder but nothing to affect their drivers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Iberiafromoz,Aug 18 2009
04:14 AM
The appeal decision was correct, only in the sense that the drivers should race and regardless of tickets sales potential. I feel if it was Brazil or another GP the same decision would and should have been taken.

However Renault should have been hit a bit harder but nothing to affect their drivers.

I told you to have faith... <thumbsup>
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Alien_SAP_Fiend
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
<dance>

It's about time the FIA cut Renault some slack!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Iberiafromoz
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
John,Aug 18 2009
07:14 AM
Iberiafromoz,Aug 18 2009
04:14 AM
The appeal decision was correct, only in the sense that the drivers should race and regardless of tickets sales potential. I feel if it was Brazil or another GP the same decision would and should have been taken.

However Renault should have been hit a bit harder but nothing to affect their drivers.

I told you to have faith... <thumbsup>

Gee! once again you were right. ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Red Andy
Member Avatar

Moderator
flood1,Aug 18 2009
03:22 AM
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie. You guys do not seem to understand the business of F1. The FOM/CVC fees, the TV fees, the sponsor fees do not have anything to do with race attendence. Those are contractural fees agreed long ago and cannot be changed or altered, and are not in anyway tied to attendance. Bernie, CVC, and everyone involved get their money regardless of the people in the seats.

Only the local promoter of the event suffers from ticket sales, and the food vendors, etc.

It is true that in the long term it may erode the promoter's will to continue to host an event, and that may reduce Bernie's take in the long run. But that is many contract years down the line.

Bernie/CVC does not directly make a penny off of event attendance. Nor do the FIA.

Good points, sort of puts a damper on the conspiracy theories that this was all a commercial stunt. It does explain why the Spanish race promoters were so keen to have the appeal upheld, of course....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Well, I do have one theory, may be this was instigated mearly to generate headlines in this rather dull 4 week <mad> shut down. Keep thin interest up and stop the fans from forgetting about F1 (when I say fans, I mean the fringe ones that make up the additional TV audience, not the hardcore that watch F1 regardless).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic »
Add Reply