certainly the outcome affects him greatly but that doesn't mean his opinion on what transpired is of any value to anyone else but himself. hopefully the ruling will be made based on the facts and not loz's ambitions to have the title handed to him
No more than any other rider. Its a farce in waiting. Any moment I'm expecting Kennith Williams to appear chased by Hattie Jaques
Seems to me he just wants to fight for it, not be handed it. Has he said he wants it overturned so he starts at the front of the grid 10 seconds ahead and has Jlo banned? Must have missed that press conference
I hope the tribunal making the judgment will hear the arguments of those having an interest in the outcome before reaching a conclusion. If a decision was made possibly adverse to Lorenzo's interests but after he had been denied any opportunity to be heard, I am guessing that might violate one of the basic principles of natural justice, audi alteram partem. No doubt Lorenzo's legal advisers would not be slow to point this out. Care to express an opinion @Zhed46 ?
I'm not sure about that. I suppose it will come down to what the rule book says about procedure and evidence. The audi alterem principle is usually only applicable to those who are the respondent to proceedings. Lorenzo could potentially have some sort of standing by way of something akin to judicial review of the decision if he can argue the panel should have taken his interests into account but didn't, howverr, I think it would be a difficult argument to run. Courts can and do take account of context when reaching decisions but they do so without actually hearing from anyone other than the parties. There is generally no locus standi for someone who is not a party to a case but who may be adversely affected by its outcome. If the arbitration panel approach the case as something other than an exercise in interpreting the rule book then they would be making a rod for their own back by essentially acknowledging that the decision will be a commercial/political one. We all know it will be, but they need to retain at least the facade of due process. There'd also be the problem of other parties claiming an interest - arguably the owners of the Valencia circuit have an interst in the outcome, as do all the companies with TV rights and we can probably think of others. So if they don't agree with the outcome then they may also want to appeal and the process could more or less go on forever! Hearing from everyone with some sort of interest in the outcome would essentially convert the proceedings from an appeal where the issues are very discreet (what if any offence did Rossi commit and if so, what is the appropriate penalty?) into something like an inquest or a public inquiry considering a much wider set of questions. My two penn'orth on the substantive issue..... I'm very surprised Marquez went down as I thought the whole idea of lever guards was to prevent accidental contact locking the front brake. If I remember rightly they were introduced after Gibernau was sent arse over tit by a collision with another rider (Stoner?). I'm also surprised that even if some part of Rossi or his bike hit the lever, that Marquez locked/lost the front on hot tyres, at very low speed and while travelling more or less in a straight line whilst almost upright. It was a very odd "accident" and it wouldn't surprise me if Marquez had deliberately laid the bike down in order to get Rossi disqualified. It doesn't make what Vale did right, and as big an admirer of him as I am, and though I believe he quite possibly should have been black flagged regardless, and I'm disappointed he lost his cool and his dignity by reacting to Marquez provocation, I think Marquez over egged it and took a dive. Football players do it all the time to try and get an opponent sent off, so why should we be shocked if a rider does it in circumstances where he is unlikely to get hurt?
