BAR controversy analysis - "Lies, Damned Lies!"

After being banned for two races, BAR today said that it will go to the people’s court with the facts. As stated in BAR website "In an effort to provide the greatest possible visibility to the outside world of its case, B.A.R Honda today will publish its entire submission to the FIA International Court of Appeal on its website for anyone interested to examine it." The entire article (PDF file of 103 pages) can be found here.

Now just in case, you are wondering what this controversy is all about. Here is a quick summary: FIA rules clearly state that the car (Car & Driver) should be more than 600 kg during the race. The FIA defines the ‘Car’ as the car drained of fuel. When Jenson Button’s car (Car & Driver) was weighed after the race, the weight was found to be 606.1 Kg (Jenson Button – 73.6 & the Car – 532.5 Kg respectively). But then the FIA found a ‘secondary compartment’ in the car with fuel and asked that the fuel in the compartment be drained. After it was drained, the car’s (Car & Driver) weight was found to be 594.6 Kg (Button – still the same 73.6! and the Car – 521.0). FIA contends that the ‘Secondary Compartment’ was a ‘Secret fuel tank’ and that BAR used it to retain the fuel pumped into the car during the final pit stop. BAR says that the secondary compartment was a ‘forward fuel collector’ and that the forward fuel collector is an integral part of their fuel system. They say that the fuel collector needs a minimum fuel level in order to maintain pressure in the accumulator.

BAR Honda claims that the cars were never below 600 Kg and the closest that they could have come was 600.9 Kg (weight calculated by using the backward calculation mechanism – since you know the final weight, you start adding/deducting the other variables that were added/used during the race ) at the first pit stop. But it is debatable since you cannot exactly calculate the tyre wear & weight due to brake loss & oil consumption (since FIA does not have official data on those). While Article 2.4 of FIA clearly states that the team should seek clarification if they feel that the regulations are unclear, BAR claims that they had no doubts on these rules & the regulations were clear to them!

Liars, Liars. After having read all the supporting facts from BAR, I am convinced that BAR did try to exploit the gray areas in the rules and certainly were dishonest with the FIA.

There are two instances in the BAR submission, that clearly points to BAR’s shenanigans.

One of them is the following:
(Since the PDF file is encrypted, I am not able to copy the text; here is the image of the PDF file)

Can you see how they have deliberately tried to hide the facts? When asked if all the fuel has been drained. They said ‘Yes’, even though the fuel collector had fuel! C'mon BAR, It is how thieves/convicts/cheats answer. (Did you steal the cash? No, No, after hours of grilling they will admit they stole only Jewels & not cash and they never said any lie)!

The second thing is an email from BAR to the fuel cell supplier. The suppliers answer is in red.



Instead of looking into their problem and fixing it, they have looked around to see if there are any other culprits and if they can find a common ground there. Sadly for them, they couldn’t find any accomplices. Again a classic example of ‘convict mentality’!

But luckily, the International Court has called the bluff. It has banned the BAR team for two races, stripped them of the points they collected in Imola & have given a 6 months ban suspended for a year. (Initially the FIA’s own stewards had bought the arguments by BAR and confirmed the third place for Button. But the FIA appealed to the International Court of Appeal)

Following is the excerpt from the International Court of Appeal’s verdict against BAR
WHEREAS it is not possible for the Court to find, on the basis of the evidence that it was provided with, that Lucky Strike BAR Honda deliberately committed fraud, their actions at the time of the emptying procedure of the vehicle after the event, and the fact that they did not use their right in accordance with Article 2.4, to address a request for clarification on the rules to the Technical Formula One Department of the FIA, show at the least a highly regrettable negligence and lack of transparency
Read the entire verdict here

The verdict is indeed a fair one! Since there were gray areas in the rule, a complete guilty verdict could not be arrived at. But, BAR HONDA ~ your credibility is definitely in question now!