FIA takes the back door!!
Effectively taking to the pit lane and moving into the garage without making a comment, that is exactly how I view the decision by the FIA (IFA), to the appeal made by Mclaren.
The FIA (IFA) simply wasted everybody’s time by actually having a hearing given that they took the simple way out. They used the rule that a drive through penalty cannot be appealed and therefore ruled in this fashion. This could have been done at the start of the proceedings, but they did not. They elected to hear evidence from both sides and this is the interesting part, because, in my opinion they created the impression that the above ruling would not be in play in terms of their ultimate decision.
They should have said that we find Lewis guilty, that would have been the better way to handle the situation. They simply did not pronounce innocence or guilty. This is shocking!!
Viva Mclaren ! Viva Lewis Hamilton ! onward to victory!!
The Devil September 24, 2008 - 1:00 pm
The FIA did not waste anybodys time. It was McLaren who apealed against a cut and dried ruling which they spelled out when the stewards gave the penalty after Spa incident. The changed their arm and should have known better.
Mike September 24, 2008 - 2:22 pm
I respectfully disagree with your comment – If the FIA decide to hear the appeal they were in fact giving voice to the Mclaren team. If the decision was not to rule, based on the drive through penalty ruling, then they needed simply to state this. There would have been no need to have gone through the hearing. This is why I say it was a waste of time. (Ps. I think you meant to say chanced their arm?)
The Devil September 24, 2008 - 5:13 pm
(Ps. I think you meant to say chanced their arm?) Whatever, I stand corrected. Didn’t bother to look it up in the dictionary.
In the same vein, my knowledge of the Queens English is a bit on the thin side. Please enlighten me on what “in fact giving voicing the McLaren team” means? I deduct, my dear Watson, that you actualy were alluding to the fact that McLaren were wrong in trying this hare-brained stunt of an appeal? LOL
Mike September 24, 2008 - 6:05 pm
My dear Holmes, your deduction pure genius, but an appeal is an appeal old pal!