From: mpconmy@gmail.com   
      
   scole  wrote:   
   > In article <10fte66$suli$1@dont-email.me>, Mark  wrote:   
   >   
   >> scole  wrote:   
   >> > In article <10fpft8$3jerl$1@dont-email.me>, Mark    
   wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >    
   >   
   > Thanks for your thoughts, Mark - all good points, well made, and   
   > interesting insights. :)   
   >   
   >> My issue - at the heart of it - is that there is not a way to "fix"   
   >> this. And if there was a wrong done (in addition to what Renault did),   
   >> it was done to all the drivers, teams and fans. The only way in which   
   >> this can be uniquely framed as being of particular focus on Massa is if   
   >> you accept his claim - which I don't - that he would definitely have   
   >> been WDC if this hadn't happened, and that his apology, compensation and   
   >> reputation reflect that version of reality.   
   >   
   > For me, bearing in mind the eventual thinnest of losing margins for the   
   > championship, I do think there is a level of credibility in this claim -   
   > I'm not saying he would *definitely* have been champion but he *probably*   
   > would have bagged enough points in Singapore otherwise that it's easy   
   > enough to imagine the season playing out fundamentally differently...   
   > Other teams and drivers were also affected, sure, but Massa was arguably   
   > affected the most. Again, can't rewrite history, and an infinity of other   
   > things may have happened had the crash not been performed, but I'm leaning   
   > towards Massa got shafted big time and the guy's got a right to have a   
   > chip on his shoulder about it.   
      
   His case hinges not on what might have been different in Singapore but   
   rather what would have been different if the FIA had definitely known   
   and taken action at the time. That's why the judge was so definitive in   
   throwing out the declaratory judgements - he explicitly said that there   
   was no way for the court to rule on the outcome of the championship, but   
   that the declarations Massa was seeking would be presented as proof that   
   he not only could have been WDC "...but if declaratory relief along   
   the lines sought were granted, that is how Mr Massa would present his   
   victory to the world, and it is also how it would be perceived by the   
   public.".   
      
   Now, if that's the case you have to look at how that would play out. The   
   most likely action (as I said in a previous post) would be for the   
   Renault points to be voided. If they were simply not counted, it has   
   zero impact on the points...but, if discovered at the time, Renault   
   would likely be disqualified in line with numerous precedents. In fact,   
   despite there having been numerous cheating scandals of varying degrees   
   of severity, I can't find a single example where the relief has been the   
   cancellation of all points as Massa things would have been the outcome.   
      
   In the case of just Renault and their drivers being disqualified,   
   everyone below gets shuffled up. Massa would have moved from 13th to   
   12th (and he was back there because of his own mistakes) while Hamilton   
   would move from 3rd to 2nd. So, Massa would still be out of the points   
   while Hamilton would have gone from 6 to 8 points. The   
   gap would have widened not narrowed with them leaving that round with   
   Hamilton on 86 to Massa's 67 instead of 84 to 67. If that led to the   
   same outcomes in the next two rounds (which you can't know for sure),   
   that still meant the Brazilian GP started with Hamilton on 96 to Massa's   
   87...an even bigger mountain to climb.   
      
   It doesn't make sense to me - what am I missing?   
      
   > It'll be interesting to see it play out in court. Like you say, Bernie and   
   > Flavio will be a real challenge for the prosecutors when they're in the   
   > dock - pure circus!   
      
   It should be an interesting case. I'm expecting Bernie to play (or for   
   real) the senility card. I expect Flavio just won't admit anything - and   
   why would he? More interesting is (as I said) what other corroborating   
   evidence exists.   
      
   That the judge let it go forward isn't an indication that Massa has a   
   strong case, just that the judge disagrees with the defence that he has   
   _no_ realistic chance of prevailing. That's a long way away from   
   winning, and a wholly different thing to believing that the remedy he is   
   asking for would be acceptable even if successful.   
      
   This is where I just have a strange feeling of someone stirring the pot   
   in the background. Unless I'm being stupid - always possible - this   
   really is quite a weak case to go in so hard on...but having gone "all   
   in", Massa has to win to an extent. If he loses - and I think he will   
   lose* - he's burnt his bridges to the F1 world and will look like an   
   embittered loser. I'm not sure he'll be any more popular in the motor   
   sporting world if he wins, but he will feel some sort of personal   
   vindication. So...in such a high stakes move, why wouldn't he seek a   
   lower-key alternative route (though maybe he tried before)? It just   
   feels like there's someone bankrolling this with a personal stake either   
   against one of the individuals or maybe as a way to mess with F1 or the   
   FIA.   
      
   I don't know - let's see what happens.   
      
   * Even though he deserves some sort of apology and compensation, that   
     doesn't mean any and all cases associated with it can win even on   
     balance of probability. There has to be solid evidence which, if he   
     has it, I don't think is public yet.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)