Michael Masi Replaced after FIA review

I think Red Flags are more for addressing on-track problems, such as wreckage blocking the track or the pits, or extreme weather or injuries. After Mick ran Latifi off the road and into the marbles, Nick then lost the car at the next corner presumeably due to dirty tires. I've always been surprised more folks didn't point fingers at Schumacher.(odd that Mick was the first driver to reach Lewis and commiserate with him) Latifi's car was stuck in the wall but it was not physically blocking the track. Latifi's car did not, in itself, require a red flag. Only the championship was begging for the Red, not the accident itself.

This is a joke, Masi was going to get screwed whatever he did -
- Lets none of the lapped cars through = bias towards Hamilton, Orange rage decends
- Lets all of the lapped cars through but cant safely restart the race and finish under a safety car = bias towards Hamilton. Orange rage decends
- Lets some of the cars through but keeps the safety car out for the regulated additional lap and finishes behind the safety car = bias towards Hamilton, Orange rage decends
- Red flags the race to turn it into a one lap shoutout = F1 is not a sport, its a joke! Purists rage decends (Also high chance Hamilton or Verstappen crash into the other one)

Lets see if the FIA actually release anything that says "This is what should have happened". The reality of following the rules and letting all the lap cars past, waiting a lap and Hamilton trundling across the line behind Bernd would only please Hamilton fans and those who believe the rules are the rules. Everyone else (including team Orange) would then all jump in saying "Let them race".

Like I said, Masi screwed from the start. At least we will now have 2 people who we can whinge about!

I'm not certain if the move was due to the changing of goalposts and integrity of the sport or due to Hamfosi going crazy in the media because of a poor season for Mercedes

Masi tried to give the millions of fans a finish worthy of a title...a green flag to checker. In most other series particularly North America he would have been heralded as a hero. But he's dumped to make bully Toto happy and sulking Lewis happy. The real problem was the rule book. If he didn't have the authority as race director to do whatever possible to ensure a race finish under green then the rules should have allowed for it.
I'm not a Lewis or Max fan so don't think I am. I'm also reminded of a b.s. decision on Vettel in Canada. But Mercedes got their way on that one and no one called for Charlie's scalp. Honestly, the drivers in F1 are first rate. The rest is crap.

Masi made numerous bad calls and was regularly indecisive and inconsistent. Right decision to replace him.

Knoxstar said:

Masi tried to give the millions of fans a finish worthy of a title...a green flag to checker. In most other series particularly North America he would have been heralded as a hero. But he's dumped to make bully Toto happy and sulking Lewis happy. The real problem was the rule book. If he didn't have the authority as race director to do whatever possible to ensure a race finish under green then the rules should have allowed for it.
I'm not a Lewis or Max fan so don't think I am. I'm also reminded of a b.s. decision on Vettel in Canada. But Mercedes got their way on that one and no one called for Charlie's scalp. Honestly, the drivers in F1 are first rate. The rest is crap.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree that the final lap was exciting or wasn't a great spectacle to watch, but that doesn't mean it was automatically the right thing to do. The rules are pretty clear on what procedures should be followed, and in this case, they weren't. If there had been a way in the rules to safely have a green flag finish, that would have been great, but as far as I'm aware, there was not. Add to that the myriad of other incidents and controversies Masi has had over the last couple of years and you I think replacing him appears to be the right decision.

(Also, another brief note, Canada 2019 was during the Masi era - he took over in Australia 2019 - and realistically that was the fault of the stewards not the Race Director. The RD has no say over penalties or the lack of penalties)

WiisardNic said:

I agree with you about the sentiment of your post, but that second one is a penalty every day of the week.

Click to expand...

Hard disagree, Hamilton was ahead before going off track and race direction never told him to give the position back, despite having several laps to think it over. Between that and Spa 2008, Hamilton was definitely on the wrong end of some pro-Ferrari stewards in the wake of Spygate.

daveclifton said:

In the same week, Prince Andrew and the FIA both admit guilt, but neither of their victims get justice.

Click to expand...

You are comparing them? Holy hell.

JayOTT said:

Hard disagree, Hamilton was ahead before going off track and race direction never told him to give the position back, despite having several laps to think it over. Between that and Spa 2008, Hamilton was definitely on the wrong end of some pro-Ferrari stewards in the wake of Spygate.

Click to expand...

It's a classic case of "he's ahead because he didn't make the corner"

WiisardNic said:

It's a classic case of "he's ahead because he didn't make the corner"

Click to expand...

But race direction still has to tell him that he's been judged to have overtaken by going off track, otherwise he can fairly argue that he was ahead before the error and hence gained nothing from it.

In any case a drive through is never the correct penalty for such a minor infringement. That's more F1's fault for not having five and ten second penalties sooner, but it goes back to my point that stewarding and race direction has always had it's fair share of boners.

@JayOTT But race direction still has to tell him that he's been judged to have overtaken by going off track, otherwise he can fairly argue that he was ahead before the error and hence gained nothing from it.

In any case a drive through is never the correct penalty for such a minor infringement. That's more F1's fault for not having five and ten second penalties sooner, but it goes back to my point that stewarding and race direction has always had it's fair share of boners.

Click to expand...

I think you've hit the nail on the head in that last bit. Personally, with both of Hamilton's infringements in 2008 that you mentioned, I believe both warranted penalties. But a drive-through for everything back then was harsh, so I'm glad that got rectified (even if it was a bit too late).

I think a key part as to why they didn't say to give the place back sooner, and forgive me because I'm just working off the highlights here, but Lewis almost immediately got past Heikki as well? Meaning he would have to give back the extra position as well.

What I want to know, is how did Mercedes sneak their obviously illeagal motor past tech inspectors? No previous iteration of that unit was so clearly overpowered. Simplying saying it was a new unit doesn't cut it, they replaced the engine several times during the season with only mild pace increases, only for the last swap with 4 races to go did they install a super-motor.

He had to go.
You can't have a race director being influenced by anybody.
He allowed Jonathan Wheatley, Christian Horner and yes...Toto Wolff too much air time.
It was annoying to hear during a live race.
He also let others into his head...hence the decision to not let any cars by, followed by let a few cars by.
This has to be about racing.
If they want a 'show' go to the matinee.

winston malcolm said:

I think the race finishing under the safety car MAY have changed the outcome but I stand to be corrected

Click to expand...

Idk… MAYBE… But we’ll never know will we? What I meant is that I believe the rules could have been applied in a way that followed the letter of the law and the outcome would have been the same. If the lapped cars aren’t allowed to pass, I just don’t see Hamilton winning with his tires. So in that sense I’m trying to give Masi the benefit of the doubt. I can honestly understand them not wanting to finish under a safety car, but there’s other ways to do it. If he wanted a shootout red flag the race, let them both change tires and go for it! That seems contrived to me, but that sort of thing goes along with the rules as written better than what happened. Anyway, I wish the new stewards the best and hope we get some good racing this year without these sorts of controversies.

Oh, he had to go. The man was weak, and completely inept.

sfairbanks486 said:

Idk… MAYBE… But we’ll never know will we? What I meant is that I believe the rules could have been applied in a way that followed the letter of the law and the outcome would have been the same. If the lapped cars aren’t allowed to pass, I just don’t see Hamilton winning with his tires. So in that sense I’m trying to give Masi the benefit of the doubt. I can honestly understand them not wanting to finish under a safety car, but there’s other ways to do it. If he wanted a shootout red flag the race, let them both change tires and go for it! That seems contrived to me, but that sort of thing goes along with the rules as written better than what happened. Anyway, I wish the new stewards the best and hope we get some good racing this year without these sorts of controversies.

Click to expand...

Get used to a deeeeep slow sonorous....Slow zone in sector 16, safety car ends in 3, 2, 1.

WiisardNic said:

I think a key part as to why they didn't say to give the place back sooner, and forgive me because I'm just working off the highlights here, but Lewis almost immediately got past Heikki as well? Meaning he would have to give back the extra position as well.

Click to expand...

Here's the lap chart for France 2008: https://www.statsf1.com/en/2008/france/tour-par-tour.aspx

Looks like Hamilton putting Coulthard between him and Vettel was the problem, though it's still hard to excuse waiting until lap 11-12 to make a decision on a lap 1 incident.

For Belgium 2008, it shouldn't be overlooked that Hamilton went wide at Pouhon and hence lost the place to Raikkonen again, only for Kimi to spin twice. I believe the issue at that point should've been considered redressed, but they still based their decision on Lewis not properly conceding at La Source even though it had no affect on the outcome.

JayOTT said:

Here's the lap chart for France 2008: https://www.statsf1.com/en/2008/france/tour-par-tour.aspx

Looks like Hamilton putting Coulthard between him and Vettel was the problem, though it's still hard to excuse waiting until lap 11-12 to make a decision on a lap 1 incident.

For Belgium 2008, it shouldn't be overlooked that Hamilton went wide at Pouhon and hence lost the place to Raikkonen again, only for Kimi to spin twice. I believe the issue at that point should've been considered redressed, but they still based their decision on Lewis not properly conceding at La Source even though it had no affect on the outcome.

Click to expand...

I think that's quite a fair assessment.
I vaguely recall other races in the past (run under Whiting) where penalties were given for not being able to hand a place back due to someone else now being in between them. For some reason Austria rings a bell.

As for Spa, I think it goes back to how Silverstone was handled this year: "We look at the incident itself, and not the outcome."

davehenrie said:

I believe we've read here that both Mercedes and Red Bull and other teams had agreed to finish races under green whenever possible. Masi took that and tried to make it possible. He was not 'making things up' , he was trying to fit the race into an AGREED UPON framework.

Click to expand...

The key word here is "whenever" . It clearly wasn't possible .

sfairbanks486 said:

Idk… MAYBE… But we’ll never know will we? What I meant is that I believe the rules could have been applied in a way that followed the letter of the law and the outcome would have been the same. If the lapped cars aren’t allowed to pass, I just don’t see Hamilton winning with his tires. So in that sense I’m trying to give Masi the benefit of the doubt. I can honestly understand them not wanting to finish under a safety car, but there’s other ways to do it. If he wanted a shootout red flag the race, let them both change tires and go for it! That seems contrived to me, but that sort of thing goes along with the rules as written better than what happened. Anyway, I wish the new stewards the best and hope we get some good racing this year without these sorts of controversies.

Click to expand...

The problem is him '"trying'" to do anything . Just apply the rules in a consistent manner. From what I've seen that's finishing behind the safety as doing otherwise wasn't possible. in this instance.