Cam wrote:Like Monaco, I daresay RBR knew full well they were on borrowed time, time they've spent refining the replacement.
Cam wrote:Yeah, the holes - which after 'clarification' needed to be slits. They knew full well they'd be banned once everyone twigged and we haven't seen them on the car since in any form. They already had another card up their sleeve and I reckon it's second verse, same as the first for this situation. They're a cluey bunch and seem to be at least one to two steps ahead each time. They don't even try to fight it, they say 'okay, no problem, we have clarification', it's as though they know it's coming.
GrizzleBoy wrote:Well they're pretty much getting away with not complying with the "spirit of the rules" every time tbh.
raymondu999 wrote:GrizzleBoy wrote:Well they're pretty much getting away with not complying with the "spirit of the rules" every time tbh.
The issue is that the teams make the cars to the letter of the regs - not the spirit of them; not to mention the spirit of the rules is very dicey as it's very much based upon personal interpretation
Nando wrote:Spirit of the rules = ban RBR, Ferrari, Mclaren, Caterham etc exhausts they all break the spirit of the rules
raymondu999 wrote:Nando wrote:Spirit of the rules = ban RBR, Ferrari, Mclaren, Caterham etc exhausts they all break the spirit of the rules
And what IS the spirit of the rules, and which FIA spokesperson told you that? We all have assumed - and are probably correct to a high degree of certainty - that that is the spirit of said rules. But put simply, we don't KNOW this.
Let's say then the FIA did release this "spirit" of the rules. How the hell do you police that? You know, courtrooms have a weird way of dumbing people down a lot. Did you know that if you get Tombazis, Prodromou, Iley and Oatley all in a courtroom, they all wouldn't see how their exhausts are benefitting them in any way?
The issue with the spirit is that you cannot make a qualitative rule no matter what, no matter where you do it, because it's very subjective. Say the FIA released a new set of regs for the exhaust for 2013. All the aero heads produce a design that they honestly believe is FULLY within the regs and within this spirit. Suddenly an FIA delegate comes along and judges them to be illegal - what then? Such qualitative markers such as the spirit of the rules is not policeable - you need something concrete and quantitative for it to be policeable.
Nando wrote:I guarantee you NONE of the designers in F1 really cares about spirit of the rules. They only care about the black and white.
raymondu999 wrote:But I'm willing to bet that if Newey is brought to the WMSC over this, he will claim he had no knowledge of the coanda effect - he simply tried his best to design an unobtrusive exhaust that complied with every single letter of the regulations to every last dot of ink.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests