They didn't win a race in '96 - it was the first race of '97 that Coulthard won.

Yes....I know that. They still started to win after 1996.

The mercgate hearing has started today. The FIA have already said, they didn't authorise the test. Not looking good for Merc.

Mercedes defence seems to be that Pirelli 'undertook' the test and so they are the ones responsible for any rule break. Don't think the tribunal will agree with that.

Brundle, Hill and Herbert all were pretty emphatic that there was no way that Merc did not learn anything from the test. Rosberg coming out and saying that he knew which tyres he was testing, cant help either. The drivers not using their normal helmets, is a mistake Merc have admitted.

I think the only thing up for debate, is what the penalty would be. Its interesting to note that Wolfe and Lauda are not at the hearing. I have a feeling, they are (and thus Mercedes) are distancing themselves from this 'scandal'. If Merc are found guilty, I cant see Brawn keeping his job, which is a shame as I quite like the guy.

Although I doubt he will struggle to find another job in F1.

Meanwhile, FIA threaten sanctions on Pirelli.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108163

As the sole supplier of tyres, what could FIA do to them? Ban them for a few races? That would be fun. Fine them? And what if they didn't pay?

A lot of hot air emitting from FIA's palace, methinks.

I agree with all of this. I wonder what punishment will be given down, is it severe enough to recieve the same punishment McLaren recieved (exclusion from the Constructors and a massive fine).

Pirelli's defence seems even worse TBH, they have pretty much said that since we don't compete in F1, we don't have to abide by the rules, to which the FIA have pointed out that their contract does say they have to...

They could fine them/withhold any due payments. If Pirelli don't pay or whatever they could take legal action for breach of contract assuming the FIA are correct about Pirelli signing up to follow the regulations.

Yet how could Pirelli be classed as a competitor? Who are they competing with?

And FIA have already acknowledged that Pirelli didn't breach the contract they have with F1.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108150

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22984415

I don't understand why Lauda would make a statement that they had written permission for the test, if they didn't. Lauda is an intelligent person, I can't see him making such a statement without it being true, or at least interpretable as such.

Or someone (eg Brawn) telling him that was the case? But if he has been misled then Ross would already be out the door.

From what I understand Mercedes sought advice from Charlie Whiting about whether testing with a 2013 car would be permissible and were told in general terms that it would be as long as Pirrelli were conducting the test and all the teams were invited. I suspect Mercedes decided at that point that it was up to Pirrelli to fulfill those obligations, not themselves, and as Pirelli as a 3rd party were (in their opinion) immune from the regulations anyway, there was little chance of the FIA doing anything. Looks like they were very wrong.

I'm expecting a disqualification from this season's CC and a very large fine for both Mercedes and Pirelli. Pirelli will take it to court and probably win. Mercedes have to decide whether to suck it up and take the punishment or throw a strop and threaten to pull out of F1. I suspect they'll do the former, especially if they've already invested a lot in next season's engines.

It seems Merc put up a pretty convincing argument yesterday. It may not be as clear cut as we initially thought. Apparently Whiting can not give a ruling on what the teams can do according to the rules, he can only give his opinion - which was news to most people. Merc had Whitings approval. It seems Marc have found quite a bit of grey area which was the bases of their case.

The FIA are now stuck, if they don't do anything, other teams will also let pirelli test using their 2013 chassis. Which makes a mockery of the no in-season testing ban. If Merc have found some loopholes how can they be fined?

I wonder if Merc get away with it, how many teams have already spoken to pirelli to do a similar test after Silverstone, knowing it's OK?

Ross Brawn is probably one of the most respected and honourable men in Formula One, I really can't see him deliberately shafting someone like Niki Lauda. At least I hope not.

I think this is the most likely option to be considered by the rest of the teams, but perhaps not by the FIA. Mercedes has hardly set the world alight since the test and the other constructors will only see an advantage by further testing.

Regarding the whole "bound by the regulations" thing, wasn't there a fuss a couple of years ago because the mechanics of some team or another did something dodgy but it was decided that they weren't bound by the FIA reg's either?
At the time that seemed a bit silly to me cos it, effectively, meant that mechanics could do all sorts of dubious things without punishment.

Seems a bit silly to suggest that Pirelli didn't do anything wrong by asking Merc' to attend the test with a "representative car" while, at the same time, suggesting that Merc' did do something wrong by agreeing to participate.

That's kinda like, say, the AAA telling the owner of a sports stadium that it'd be okay to invite athletes to test a new running track but then prosecuting the athletes who did so for gaining some kind of unfair advantage.

Also not keen on the whole "it probably gave Merc' an advantage" thing either.
If the FIA can prove that Merc' gained some advantage by the test, or even demonstrate that it's likely, then fair enough.
If they're just going to say "Well, they probably did so we're gonna find them guilty" that's all rather lynchmob mentality.

I mean, if the FIA can demonstrate that Merc' revised the spec' of the car after the Pirelli test that might be sufficient evidence but there needs to BE some evidence rather than just assumption.

Alas, I can't help thinking that what's really going on here is that Napoleon is just trying to absolve the FIA of responsibility and then decide where else the blame might be placed instead.

Mercedes found guilty of cheating but let off with almost no punishment.

Worst let off since Hamilton got away with passing the safety car.

Absolute farce, governing bodies of any sport are scared stiff of making decisions now, because they are worried they will get taken to court over it.
Grow a pair for gods sake, now every team will do what they want.

Trouble is, "growing a pair" usually involves learning to accept responsibility for your own f**k-ups as well.

In this case, the FIA signed a contract with Pirelli which allowed this situation to occur and then FIA representatives offered advice which they were actually not entitled to give so a lot of the responsibility should rest with the FIA.

Seems, to me, like the whole thing has been resolved in a way designed to absolve the FIA of responsibility without upsetting anybody else enough that they'll complain loudly.

I wouldn't mind betting that there's a clause in the judgement which says that Merc' and Pirelli accept the judgement on the understanding that they don't discuss it further.

So it turns out FIA could have avoided this whole thing by simply being half-way competent in communicating with teams.

It's a massive, professional sport run by amateurs. Embarrassing.

Offical ruling here

Yeah total disgrace. No testing is a fundamental rule. How Mercedes are going to get away with testing and still be in the campioships is beyond me.

Something has to be done so the FIA take action against serious infractions like this.

I really don't know why any of the rules are applied now.

Do you want me to pick up your teddy and put it back in your pram?

So, basically, Merc' were given bad advice by the FIA prior to the test and it was Pirelli's responsibility to organise the test on an equitable basis but, at the end of the day, Merc' were guilty of breaching article 22 of the sporting reg's and were punished on that basis.

Seems pretty fair to me.

I guess the Pirelli contract is going to need revising for next year.