Re: Patrick head on diffusers, regulations and following the letter of the law

Bob Dubery wrote:

On Oct 21, 12:08 pm, "Bigbird" <Bigbird.usenetNOS...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bob Dubery wrote:
On Oct 21, 10:51 am, "Bigbird" <Bigbird.usenetNOS...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

AFAIK the TWG included representation from all teams. The TWG
approved the proposed regulations. Now three of those teams who
did so later went on to significantly undermine the overtly
stated aims of those regulations. That was the time for them to
speak up in that spirit of co-operation and for the good of the
sport.
You're playing the popular game of acting as if you know what the
motivation was.

Elaborate.

I've said before that I don't have as much trust in
your powers of mind reading as you do.

You don't even recognise the irony, do you?



And you're ignoring some facts here. The ultimate aim of the OWG
was to cut downforce by 50%.

Wrong.

Now Ross Brawn had already stood up and said
words to the effect of "we at Honda have implemented the proposed
regulations and are coming up with more downforce than the OWG
envisages. So we think that you need to restrict the diffuser as
follow...".

I don't recognise that quote. Where is it from?

His proposal was not accepted. So it's hard to see how he
was trying to pull a fast one or trying to undermine the OWG's
intentions.

Shouldn't be if you read my assessment.



You're also ignoring the other statement from Head, which amounts
to "most" (Head's word) cars having aero devices that comply with
the regs but not with the OWG's proposals.

Is it pertinent?



 Instead they chose not to
overtly indicate the error that had been made. Brawn admits
being aware of it yet he chose to keep it to himself in order
to retain an advantage. It is meaningless to say he made other
proposals if he did not directly address the problems he now
claims they would solve.
You have to say these things as if they are irrefutable because
you've already taken a position on this that doesn't fit with the
facts.

I'm not sure you are very good at discerning facts. Please
elaborate.

So
you have to either back down from the previously stated position
- and it's not the end of the world, none of us know everything -
or increase the bluster.

I'm pretty sure you don't understand my position.

And you're guessing at motives again. You have no way of knowing
what any of the team bosses or designers involved were thinking.

Please remind yourself of that.



The FIA who bear ultimate responsibility also failed to frame
the regulations in a meaningful way or write in safeguards.
FOTA vetted the rules and insisted on rewrites until they were
satisfied. What part of that do you not understand?

Why do you not understand that this undermines your case, not
supports it.



Once the rules were finalised - with FOTA's approval - it is
FIA's job to pronounce on wether cars are compliant with the
regulations or not.

The FIA finalise the rules.

Lest' be absolutely clear on this because it is a FACT that you
seem to want avoid.

They did that.

Ultimately the sport and the viewer are the losers due to the
lack of integrity and sportsmanship of the minority.
Bollocks! Unless you want to have us believe that "most" means
"miority".

What? Please just stop typing and try to comprehend for a moment.

You just sound stupid attempting to contradict every point on
principal.



Further we will continue to lose as the problem has not been
addressed and the spirit of trust has disintegrated.

I'd not say that.

No, of course you wouldn't.

You wouldn't even attempt to understand why I say it?

FOTA seems to have held together quite well and
continues to work. Wether any of the teams trusted all the others
in the first place is a matter of conjecture. I'd imagine that
the TWG was a pragmatic matter rather than the manifestation of a
sudden outbreak of brotherly love along the pit lane.

Interestingly FOTA have been working hard on various regulations.
Have they tried to modify this one? Remember they need a 70%
vote, not unanimity.

Factually challenged again.

Any changes for 2010 require unanimity.

Please refer to both FOTA policy and the FIA regs.

What they have done is get rid of the wheel covers, saying
that this was one of the items causing problems for following
cars. They have now had a chance to rewrite the regs governing
the diffuser, and they can pass this with a 70% majority. Has an
attempt to do this been made?


I see the new game being played now: You got one thing wrong therefore
EVERYTHING is wrong.


Wrong, Bob. I'm trying to avoid your games.

In the meantime you want me to consider your questions but won't
consider mine.

Rubbish. I have made several responses. Many require you to provide
clarification if you are able. Others question your ability to provide
facts.

I'm not sure what questions you believe I have not answered but then
your post is a bit of a mess isn't it.


You want a debate then you have to change the way you do things -
doing what you demand of others would be a good start.

There can be no debate if you run away without making your case clear.

If you want anything else then carry on as you are.

Are you going to rectify your post or not?

--
Bigbird
#
.

Relevant Pages