We’re only two races into the F1 season for 2009, and there is already more news coverage of the teams’ appearance in court, and of the drivers’ points position having more to do with rulings than their on-track performance.
I can work with learned people and apply the rules laid down in ISO and British Standards’ documentation, which is simpler, yet more important – and even life-preserving, than the content of the F1 rule book, yet the latter has more words and detail which seem to lead to more, rather than less, confusion.
There have been plenty of changes made to the rules in respect of the cars, in the name of making things “interesting”, and credit where credit is due, they have at last actually got around to doing what I said they should have done years ago, by finally reducing the aerodynamic aids, and increasing the mechanical grip.
They should look inwards now, and do something about the completely amateurish way in which they manage and apply their own rules.
Here’s a simple suggestion:
The cars/designs are subject to extensive review, examination and approval before the race. If those learned stewards and officials are doing their jobs in any way that suggests they should keep them, then a line should be drawn after that scrutineering session is completed and the results signed off and filed. The cars should be deemed legal at that stage, and remain legal for the following race. End of story – and any appeals etc would have to be submitted and completed prior to the race. Frivolous protests could be prevented by having a time limit, or excluding both protester and protested from the race, so there are no more “musical chair” race results as the drivers move up and down the points as official change the race order.
Appeals and rule changes can still follow – for race incidents – and subsequent rule changes and design changes would apply to following races, but would not be applied to previoius races that had taken place, and so avoid the stupid situation we have at the moment where the officials are doing little more than showing themselves as incompetent.
They must be, if they are changing their rulings, supposedly arrived at after they carried out competent pre-race inspection and scrutineering sessions.
I don’t suppose anything will change – unless folk get fed with this rule nonsense and vote with their feet, on the basis that they might as well throw dice as watch the races to their conclusion to see the outcome.