Helmut Marko: Max Verstappen’s pay packet ‘really annoys’ Lewis Hamilton

[Monty]

https://www.planetf1.com/news/helmut-marko-lewis-hamilton-dig-ferrari/

Marko talks more total rubbish!
Hamilton gives a huge percentage of his total wealth to charity. He has been a top earner for more years than Verstappen has been getting a driver’s salary.
He might be correct that Lewis is unhappy that he isn’t currently a World Champion but everyone knows that he was cheated of his justifiable 8th WDC by the FIA in 2021 and was beaten by a car that had been developed outside the cost cap rules in 2022 - that would make anyone unhappy.
This year Hamilton has been very gracious about the fact that the Mercedes is not as good as the Red Bull - he could have whinged that, yet again, the RBR cars were developed outside of the cost cap rules. If the roles were reversed, I wonder what Verstappen, Marko and Horner would be saying!

[John S]

You make good points Monty, however it would seem that Lewis' first championship was won under just as controversial circumstances to his last loss.

Massa is desperate to get folks, and maybe even courts, to listen that 'Crashgate' was known about in top reaches of F1 well in time to void race result in question and change WDC result. Hell even Bernie now admits it was pure expediancy to hush it up.

Guess what goes around comes back around sometimes to bite in the bum.

 

[rmassart]

Unless I am missing something, these two situations are quite different. It's not McLaren who were cheating, but Renault. The fact that this helped Hamilton more than Massa is kind of just the role of the dice. In addition Massa messed up his first pit stop and dropped to last.  I am not sure the race result would have been voided. Has that ever happened in F1? I think Massa will never win this in any court.

[Andy B]

Is it not in the rules that one week after a race result it cannot be contested!

[John S]

Unless I am missing something, these two situations are quite different. It's not McLaren who were cheating, but Renault. The fact that this helped Hamilton more than Massa is kind of just the role of the dice. In addition Massa messed up his first pit stop and dropped to last.  I am not sure the race result would have been voided. Has that ever happened in F1? I think Massa will never win this in any court.

Sure McLaren were not the guilty party but then neither was Red Bull in the Bahrain controversy. Both Max & Lewis can be seen simply as beneficiaries of someone else's c*ck-ups IMHO.

[Alianora La Canta]

I don't think Lewis knows or cares how much Max earns.

[Monty]

Sure McLaren were not the guilty party but then neither was Red Bull in the Bahrain controversy. Both Max & Lewis can be seen simply as beneficiaries of someone else's c*ck-ups IMHO

This doesn’t change my point that Hamilton had just cause to be ‘unhappy’.
Frankly the Massa argument is pathetic at this late date and based on something said by Ecclestone who is hardly a trustworthy source!!!
Finally, I can (and do) place some of the blame for the fiasco at Bahrain on Red Bull because of the radio and e-Mail pressure they applied to Masi!

[Alianora La Canta]

Is it not in the rules that one week after a race result it cannot be contested!

It's a bit more complicated than that. According to FIA regulations:

- Contests for specific races must be filed within 72 hours of the race...
- ...Unless there is substantial new evidence that makes it impossible for the result to stand, in which case the matter can be re-opened within 14 days of the race...
- ...Unless that makes the decision still open 4 days before the FIA Gala, in which case the contest must be filed before then. (Note that if the original contest boundary ends after the "4 days before the FIA Gala", then the decision isn't affected by this).

This matters if the matter remains within the FIA. However, if going to the law courts about the situation, none of this matters because national law for statutes of limitations apply. I would expect this to be French national law because that's the FIA's home court, and in this case also Renault's. (The other options are the USA, Brazil and Singapore, these being Liberty's home court - relevant as it was its former guise's former boss Bernie Ecclestone who revealed the information that started this process and also because it pays out financial rewards to teams - Massa's home court, and the venue of the crime's court respectively, in decreasing order of likelihood).

France: since no fixed properties or actual injuries are involved, the statute of limitation is 5 years - unless a criminal charge is suggested, in which case things get more complicated. Suffice to say that unless the charge is for an offence type for which the judge is technically allowed to punish with at least 2 months' imprisonment (regardless of whether this specific case would merit the maximum offence), everyone can stop worrying if France is deemed the competent court. If it is such a criminal charge, then as long as the court case ends before the end of September 2028, there's a problem.

USA: Liberty is based in New York. Civil law statute of limitation can't exceed 3 years. However, if any sort of crime is alleged and Bernie is personally named as a defendent, the case will run (with everyone involved!) because only time Bernie spent in the state of New York counts towards the statue of limitations, and I seriously doubt he's spent a whole year in New York (the minimum required to run the clock down on the most minor criminal charges). If Bernie is not named as a defendent, Liberty need only worry if a Class A felony is alleged (since those don't have statute of limitations), and I'm struggling to see any that is applicable here (unless he's going for the "Liberty robbed me in 2008 and at least one other person later on of their titles, thus this constitutes enterprise corruption" (New York requires two instances for it to count as enterprise corruption of the necessary level to avoid the statute of limitations, but those two instances don't need to be within a particular timeframe of each other, nor does the appellant need to be the target of both provided he was the target of one and the accused was involved in both. Thus Massa could - but probably won't - claim 2008 and 2021 as his two examples and not necessarily be laughed out of the room).

Brazil: All legal claims that could sensibly be applied here (civil or criminal) can be made up to 10 years after the cause of the action. If Massa states Bernie's revelations about Singapore 2008 are the cause, he can make a civil claim against anyone he thinks needs to be claimed against (since he's the reason Brazil could even be considered as the court of claim). Otherwise, no case is possible (so Renault and the FIA need not worry in any case).

Singapore: 6 years for civil cases - but only counted from when the fraud was discovered. Bernie Ecclestone and Liberty's involvement is within the period and thus could be sued for, but the FIA's and Renault's could not (as their involvement in the matter hasn't been secret since 2009). Any criminal charge, no matter how minor, has no statute of limitations and could involve anyone.

(Of course, vexatious-in-the-FIA's-opinion cases can get the party clobbered with an Article 151c penalty, regardless of the court used, although this would be very risky if the court in question found for Massa rather than the FIA/Renault/Bernie/Liberty/the Piquets/[add anyone else involved here]).