dave34m wrote:Early on the stewards said that the comments LH made to the media conflicked with the evidence he had given them.
Im not sure why they took LH word over trullis at the stewards meeting but the reports in the media suggested that something was wrong with the whole thing.
Im a big McLaren fan and a New Zealander and I dont like what has happened here at all.
Trulli said he told the stewards that LH slowed so much off line that he thought LH had a mechanical issue and he couldn't go any slower and keep up with the safety car so he had no choice but to regain the position. LH said the opposite, that he didn't let him by and that he wasn't told to let him by.
Trulli says "North". LH says "South". Somebody is lying and it is the stewards job to get the facts straight before ruling. Why didn't they penalize JT for lying when he asserted the exact opposite as LH did before the stewards? There is no "opinion" here as mikhak would have us believe. JT's testimony was very certain, detailed and explicit. He said the LH slowed so much off line that he thought he had a reliability issue and that he had to pass to keep up with the safety car. There is no "opinion" there. It is an explicit assertion of facts that was contrary to LH's version.
The stewards were simply derelict in their duties, failed to conduct even the most basic investigation, failed to confer properly with their own Race Director Charlie Whiting who had all the records from Mac's pitwall on the highly touted FIA instant emailing system wherein Mac said that they just told LH to let JT through (reference to this communication with Charlie Whiting is on the radio transcript). The stewards then made an indefensible, rash and hasty ruling that was so wrong that they were forced to reverse it 4 days later. But instead of owning up to their incompetence, they blame shifted and said their ruling was based upon believing LH. This necessarily means they didn't believe JT's explicit contrary version. Someone was lying and their first ruling meant that they chose to believe that JT's very explicit assertions were in fact, lies. But strangely enough they didn't punish JT under article 220.127.116.11.4.86 (or whatever). This is further evidence of the FIA complete incompetence and inconsistency.
And where was mikhak during the 4 days when the FIA held to the position that JT's testimony had to be false? Was he calling for JT's head on a platter? I missed that somehow.
This whole thing is one big FIA smokescreen and the people have fallen for the diversion. Face it, the FIA are a bunch of boobs.