2021 São Paulo Grand Prix - Interlagos, Nov 12-14

[Tvetovnato]

This is quite remarcable, like having a fuel tank that's too big or car being too light. When did a team cheat like this, other than the Ferrari fuel gate?
Flexing wings and squatting suspension is more like the gray area stuff we usually see.

Very premature to accuse someone of cheating when no details have been presented. The team knows they will be probed at some point, so wouldn’t it be quite embarassing and foolish to try an obvious cheat like that when you will 100 % get caught at some point?

Yes it would be very embarassing for Mercedes, that’s why I find it remarcable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a RB fan trying to stirr some s*** up, just that it's unusual to see cars fail these tests.

My point is that you called it cheating, without knowing if actually is about cheating, or some other factor influencing the difference since nothing has been presented yet.

[f1jcw]

I’m afraid law does not work like this.

All that’s needed is an element of doubt.

If Max touched the exact part that failed the test (and before the test) then it’s thrown out on a technicality.

However, Max breaking the rules is night and day so a penalty.

I believe in a court of law an expert would be called to determine the failure mode and if such an incidental brush could cause said failure. As an expert I'm going to say it cannot/would not. It's for the court to decide whether how to weight my testimony

Wrong. We are not calling a expert if a certain thing can do something.

We are looking at evidence tampering. Evidence that has being tampered with is thrown out of the court case.

[nokivasara]

Very premature to accuse someone of cheating when no details have been presented. The team knows they will be probed at some point, so wouldn’t it be quite embarassing and foolish to try an obvious cheat like that when you will 100 % get caught at some point?

Yes it would be very embarassing for Mercedes, that’s why I find it remarcable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a RB fan trying to stirr some s*** up, just that it's unusual to see cars fail these tests.

My point is that you called it cheating, without knowing if actually is about cheating, or some other factor influencing the difference since nothing has been presented yet.

Good point. We'll see in a few hours if they have an explanation or not.

[Dee]

I’m afraid law does not work like this.

All that’s needed is an element of doubt.

If Max touched the exact part that failed the test (and before the test) then it’s thrown out on a technicality.

However, Max breaking the rules is night and day so a penalty.

I believe in a court of law an expert would be called to determine the failure mode and if such an incidental brush could cause said failure. As an expert I'm going to say it cannot/would not. It's for the court to decide whether how to weight my testimony

Wrong. We are not calling a expert if a certain thing can do something.

We are looking at evidence tampering. Evidence that has being tampered with is thrown out of the court case.

You have to prove it was tampered with

[DChemTech]

and utterly irrelevant

And why is that? It clearly sets a precedent that touching a car in Parc Ferme does not automatically lead to a penalty. Sure, if touching altered something, that should lead to a penalty - but the mere act of contact in itself, by this precedent, should not.

[Magicsenna_41]

Thats why he is called Super-Max

[TwanV]

We also can't disprove that it was tampered with in transit or any other off camera moment either. Ey ey?

[f1jcw]

and utterly irrelevant

And why is that? It clearly sets a precedent that touching a car in Parc Ferme does not automatically lead to a penalty. Sure, if touching altered something, that should lead to a penalty - but the mere act of contact in itself, by this precedent, should not.

Just cause he got away with breaking a rule at the time doesn't mean the rule can be ignored in future. Plus the part that Vettel touched didn't then go to fail testing, if it had, then I am quite sure Vettel would be up before the stewards aswell.

[aral]

what is interesting is that after climbing out of the bull, max took off his gloves and looked at his own rear wing. then he walked over to the merc and "touched" the wing of that, in the same positions. so, how did max know to compare the two wings? did he observe it during quali? or was he told from the pits that there was something possibly wrong?

[Mogster]

Max was clearly aware of Newey’s protest. Team personnel shouldn’t be touching another teams stuff without permission. End of.

Looking at something that’s in front of them, fair game, touching the car, especially in an area that’s about to be protested has to come with some sort of penalty that draws a line.

[DChemTech]

and utterly irrelevant

And why is that? It clearly sets a precedent that touching a car in Parc Ferme does not automatically lead to a penalty. Sure, if touching altered something, that should lead to a penalty - but the mere act of contact in itself, by this precedent, should not.

Just cause he got away with breaking a rule at the time doesn't mean the rule can be ignored in future. Plus the part that Vettel touched didn't then go to fail testing, if it had, then I am quite sure Vettel would be up before the stewards aswell.

As I said, if they can reasonably argue it broke because of Max touching, that is another matter. I find it hard to see how a mild touch would break a component that can withstand significant on track loads, but alas, that's to be scrutinized.

But, if the stewards are consistent, they should not penalise touching in itself based on precedent. And if it turns out the Merc-DRS was really illegal, one could argue Max had more reason to touch anything than Seb had in any of the above cases.

[Ryar]

And why is that? It clearly sets a precedent that touching a car in Parc Ferme does not automatically lead to a penalty. Sure, if touching altered something, that should lead to a penalty - but the mere act of contact in itself, by this precedent, should not.

Just cause he got away with breaking a rule at the time doesn't mean the rule can be ignored in future. Plus the part that Vettel touched didn't then go to fail testing, if it had, then I am quite sure Vettel would be up before the stewards aswell.

As I said, if they can reasonably argue it broke because of Max touching, that is another matter. I find it hard to see how a mild touch would break a component that can withstand significant on track loads, but alas, that's to be scrutinized.

But, if the stewards are consistent, they should not penalise touching in itself based on precedent. And if it turns out the Merc-DRS was really illegal, one could argue Max had more reason to touch anything than Seb had in any of the above cases.

My theory is, he was checking the temperature difference between his own rear wing Vs that of a Mercedes. I guess Red Bull are having some issues with Rear Wing cracking and it probably has something to do with heat absorption of the rear wing. So Max is trying to feel the heat difference, like you do on a heating pan on the stove.

[RZS10]

what is interesting is that after climbing out of the bull, max took off his gloves and looked at his own rear wing. then he walked over to the merc and "touched" the wing of that, in the same positions. so, how did max know to compare the two wings? did he observe it during quali? or was he told from the pits that there was something possibly wrong?

It was brought up earlier in the thread and it's mentioned in an AMuS article for example.
tl:dr RBR believe that there's some flexibility built into the rear wing (flap?) of the Merc and brought this to the FIA's attention prior to Q, Merc then said there's nothing to protest and ran the wing anyways. Max might have wanted to see if there's more 'give' in one part? Only he (and maybe RB) knows what he was actually doing.
It's likely that the two matters are unrelated even though they pertain to the same part of the car.

[pantherxxx]

So you can race with an illegal car, but if someone violates parc ferme rules i.e. touches your car, then it nullifies everything? I don't think so.

[west52keep64]

Car 44 has quite clearly failed the 85mm test on the rear wing, so regardless of the outcome of the other investigation, it's highly likely Hamilton will start from the pit lane for sprint qualifying.

In terms of the investigation in to Verstappen, by the letter of the rules, he did break them. There's no modern precedent for this, I think the punishment is likely to be a reprimand with additional clarification on what drivers are allowed to do in parc ferme.