smap

Dont know if you guys have heard.

But this is starting to worry me!

After the progress that they have made since the last few weeks.
And if they are to take a win this season, if they are still competing, (although i doubt that they will get kicked out) I think it will be tainted by this scandal!

NoOoooOoO!

Source - itv-f1.com


FRY PROFESSES BAR'S INNOCENCE

This is basically a follow up story of the cheating scandal. If you actually want more detailed info on the matter I guess you can search around.

YBA

now that could kill a company's reputation...

astro

i don't think anything will come of it...but I suppose we will see....

Edward'TLS

Which company ? BAR or Honda ?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

What was BAR's explanation that was accepted by the race stewards?

AztecRol

iTrader: (2)

I guess we will find out tomorrow!!! This is from F1.com.


Following Sunday’s event, in which Button finished third, his car was found to be underweight after being drained of fuel. However, BAR then supplied an explanation, satisfying the stewards that the car was legal throughout the race.

However, the FIA is obviously not happy with the stewards’ verdict and the matter is now provisionally scheduled to go before the International Court of Appeal in Paris on May 4.

Expressing their surprise at the FIA move, BAR’s CEO Nick Fry commented: "BAR Honda will provide the same rigorous data presented to the stewards last night and is confident that it can prove once again that the car was fully compliant with the FIA Technical Regulations throughout the San Marino Grand Prix."

Should the FIA’s appeal prove successful, Button could be disqualified from the Imola results, which would elevate McLaren’s Alexander Wurz to third place and bring Williams’ Mark Webber up into the points in eighth.

Chief F1 Fan

Even worse news, will BAR get barred from championship today??

FIA CALLS FOR BAR EXCLUSION
Last Updated: Wednesday, 04, May, 2005, 12:20


Formula 1’s governing body has called for the BAR-Honda team to be thrown out of the 2005 world championship at the Appeal Court hearing in Paris.

The FIA also recommended that the team be fined a minimum of one million euros in the evidence dossier it submitted to the Court.

“The FIA asks the Court to exclude the Lucky Strike BAR Honda team from the 2005 Formula One World Championship and to fine the team at least one million Euros,” said an FIA spokesman.

The governing body is appealing the verdict of race stewards at the San Marino Grand Prix to uphold Jenson Button’s third place finish despite the fact that Briton’s car was found to be 5 kg below the 600 kg minimum weight limit.


Just when BAR/Honda starts doing things right some mechanic/engineer neglects checking the car's dry weight before the race. 10 kilos is like 27 pounds isn't it? Christ, one piece of expensive ballast and they would not be looking at this mess. The only mitigating factor is that BAR showed the stewards conclusive proof the car never ran below a the 600 kg weight during the race. Idiots.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Max Moseley is going to drive all of the teams away from F1 if the can't overlook a bona fide unintentional error. It's not like BAR made a premeditated attempt to cheat.

F-C

Will be interesting to see what the verdict will be. When is the verdict going to be announced? By Friday?

The good news from today's hearing is that the FIA never challenged BAR's claim that the car ever went under weight during the weekend. Therefore, even if the FIA finds that BAR made a rules infraction, I doubt we will see the same penalty that the FIA dished out on Toyota a few years ago to ban the team for an entire season.

dom

When was Toyota banned for an entire season?

rdml07

I think he's talking about Toyota's ban from the WRC few years back...probably a decade back...its been a long time....since you know, FIA is the governing body of F1, WRC, etc...etc..

rdml07

BTW, FIA better not throw out BAR from the championship!! Damn you Max!!

dom

Ah....thats right.

ilitig8

I assume he was talking about WRC (also overseen by the FIA) for the turbo bypass, which coincedentally may have been the reason they migrated to F1.





Vandy


OOPS, a little late!

They won't toss them out, but I would guess they loose the San Marino points, they have to do something since it is such a black and white rule, matters little that the car was never under weight in the race it and Jens didn't meet the 600kg dry rule. Maybe if he had gone on his drinking/dancing binge a couple of weeks earlier he may have made up the extra weight!

Chief F1 Fan

More on why BAR thinks they are right:

At a hearing in Paris on Wednesday, the FIA claimed that BAR had deliberately set out to gain an “illegitimate and unfair advantage” over their rivals. They then asked the International Court of appeal to exclude the team and fine them at least one million euros.

The appeal concerns Jenson Button’s third place finish at Imola and the fact that his car was found to underweight once drained of fuel following the race. BAR maintain that the car was legal throughout the event, a claim that the San Marino race stewards agreed with.

The focus of the hearing was a small, secondary fuel tank on Button’s car, which the FIA admitted they were aware of. When this was emptied the car fell under the minimum 600 kilogram weight limit.

However, BAR technical director Geoffrey Willis told the Court that the additional tank was a collector tank which had to hold a minimum of six litres of fuel at all times in order for the car to function.

After the two-and-a-half hour hearing, BAR CEO Nick Fry said he was convinced the team had successfully made their case and that he expected the Court to find in their favour. A decision is expected on Thursday afternoon.



It all centers around that secondary tank apparently but the question I have is does 6 liters of fuel weigh the same as 10 kgs? Probably more right?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Well, based on the density of gasoline, which is 0.7g/mL or 0.7kg/L, the 6L of fuel weighs in at 4.2 kgs.

However, assuming that BAR's explanation fits, then the density of the fuel must be 1.67kg/L, which is significantly denser than water. I dunno about that...

kurt_bradley

Imagine the countersuit that would follow. BAR-Honda is a pair of giant companies: British American Tobacco and Honda Motor Company. To attempt to exclude them would open up all sorts of issues when it comes to funding and sponsorship. I imagine the court will not rule to exclude them, but the fines are going to be imposed if there is fault pointed to BAR. If the judgement rules in favor of the FIA side, there will be a hefty fine...probably one to set and example.

ilitig8

F1 "gas" is generally lighter than our pump gas so it makes the argument less intuative however they obviously had a better thought out argument to get past the "bridge of death" on Sunday.



As for the exclusion it would be unprecedented (least in my memory). Loss of points/position ie DQ from San Marino and fine would be more "normal".

As another point I wonder what the "rats" got paid, I seem to remember the FIA offering 1 mil for this type of info, but don't know what the requirements are to claim the money.

Chief F1 Fan

The "rats" are the stewards of the race who examined the car post-race in parc ferme. Here's some more news on today's proceedings, sounds extremely intense:

BAR'S FATE HANGS IN THE BALANCE
Last Updated: Wednesday, 04, May, 2005, 18:48


BAR-Honda’s fate hangs in the balance this evening following today’s FIA Court of Appeal hearing in Paris over the legality of the fuel system it used in the San Marino Grand Prix.

The court sat for nearly three hours and then adjourned to consider the evidence prior to delivering its verdict tomorrow.

The stakes could not be higher with the FIA having urged the judges to throw BAR out of the 2005 world championship and impose a fine of at least one million euros.

The FIA claimed that BAR “set out deliberately to gain an illegitimate and unfair advantage over other teams, an act prejudicial to the interests of the competition and to the interests of motor sports generally”.

BAR denied any wrongdoing and vehemently rejected the accusation of foul play.

The Brackley-based outfit has enlisted the services of a high-powered legal team led by top London barrister David Pannick, whose previous clients include Her Majesty the Queen and tennis star Greg Rusedski.

Pannick said that the dispute centred on the interpretation of Formula 1’s complex technical regulations and that the FIA’s claim that BAR had been “guilty of fraudulent conduct” was not sustained by the evidence.

The kernel of BAR’s case was that the 600kg minimum weight limit applies to the car in the state that it finishes the race, rather than when completely drained of fuel, and that the regulations do not expressly prohibit using fuel as ballast.

The FIA contended that the regulations are perfectly clear and that an edict dating back to 1994 emanating from the Technical Working Group makes it clear that cars will be weighed without fuel on board.

Technical director Geoff Willis also attempted to prove that the BAR 007 does not operate properly with less than 6kg of fuel on board, and that this functional necessity, not an underhand attempt to steal a performance advantage, was the purpose of the secondary collector fuel tank.

Accordingly, Willis said that, “We believe that the weight of fuel in the collector is part of the weight of the car.”

FIA technical delegate Jo Bauer did not argue that the secondary fuel cell per se was illegal, and revealed that the FIA had known about BAR’s system since the Malaysian Grand Prix.

However, Bauer’s assistant Kris de Groot, the man responsible for carrying out the fuel check at Imola, suggested that BAR had not complied adequately with his request for the car to be completely drained of fuel.

“I asked for a full drain-out and afterwards I found more fuel,” he said.

Willis disputed this description of the procedure his team was asked to perform, saying that “the request we had was to do a lifted pump out; we have never been asked to do a full pump out.”

Pannick urged the court to dismiss the appeal and said the FIA’s recommended sanctions would be “manifestly disproportionate, as would be any exclusion from future events.”

In his summing-up speech Pannick suggested that, in the event that the court disagreed with BAR’s interpretation of the regulations, a “modest fine” would be the only appropriate penalty.




I say fine and loss of points scored for last race is fair enough if guilty, it sure doesn't seem purposeful conduct and the FIA was fully aware of BAR's secondary tank. I like BAR's argument that the secondary tank and its mandatory holding of fuel equals ballast as the car cannot run at ALL w/o it. This is why there's always a good argument to be made as an attorney and why I love the law.

smap

Supposedly, the "rats" are two former BAR employees, who now work for other rival teams. The told the FIA about BAR's fuel thingy at the Imola race.
I doubt that this is intentional cheating on BAR's part.......

So to the 2 former BAR employees for creating all this trouble, if BAR are found not guilty!!

2 former BAR employees!

Oh well back onto a serious note, I really hope that this BullS**t is all cleared!!!!
And more on that I hope BAR win in Spain if they are found not guilty.

Its funny though when Jo Bauer (sp?) was asked if other teams had this fuel collector thingy, he would not comment as it was a case of confidentiality for the other teams. So one would assume that the other teams run with this thingy-majig as well, so why is it that BAR are the only ones to get fried on this?

Or I could just be reading all this in the wrong way!

Chief F1 Fan

The FIA knew before Imola: read again=

FIA technical delegate Jo Bauer did not argue that the secondary fuel cell per se was illegal, and revealed that the FIA had known about BAR’s system since the Malaysian Grand Prix.

Chief F1 Fan

Nick Fry, BAR CEO's comments about the proceedings:

FRY 'VERY HAPPY' WITH COURT HEARING


Without going so far as to say he was confident his team will be exonerated, Fry declared himself satisfied with the way the arguments played out in the Paris coutroom.



“It was never challenged that the car was below the minimum weight limit. That wasn’t even raised, and I think it’s a good point to start with that we were above the 600kg – which of course we have always maintained.”

Fry added that he believed the FIA’s charges of “fraudulence” and “deception” had been shown to be unfounded.


So, it seems the crux of the argument the team was deliberately cheating w/ an underweight car did not come to fruition in the Appeals hearing yesterday. Let's hope nothing happens.

dom

2 Race Ban

5/5/2005 8:52:53 AM

BAR-Honda's chances for a Formula One championship in 2005 were dealt a serious blow on Thursday after the FIA Court of Appeal disqualified the team from the San Marino Grand Prix and suspended them for the next two races.

FIA, the governing body of motorsport, had asked for the team to be disqualified from the 2005 championship.

The ruling follows a hearing on Wednesday at which team officials were asked to explain why Jenson Button's car was found to be underweight during a post-race inspection. The hearing focused on the legality of two carbon-fibre fuel tanks located in the main tank of the car.

The team says the tanks pressurize the fuel before it is injected into the engine.

"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... show at the least a highly regrettable negligence and lack of transparency," read a statement released by the Court of Appeal regarding its decision.

Button was initially disqualified from his third place finish in the race by race stewards but that decision was reversed some six hours later following an explanation by BAR-Honda officials.

The explanation did not satisfy FIA, which in turn appealed the race stewards decision to the Court of Appeal.

After hearing arguments from both sides on Wednesday, the Court ruled that BAR-Honda were unable to prove that the car complied with current regulations concerning minimum weight throughout the duration of the event.

"The presentation of the team of fuel consumption data cannot guarantee that the vehicle complied at all times with the minimum weight requirements of Article 4.1," said the Court in its verdict.

Documents showed that Button's car weight 594.6 kg after all of its fuel had been drained, which is below the 600 kg minimum specified by the technical regulations.

"The only way in which the vehicle could meet the requirement of the minimum weight of 600 kg was to have used fuel as ballast, which does not conform to the (regulations)", said the Court.

The Court also noted an additional 8.92 kg of fuel remained in the tank in a special compartment and a further 2.46 kg of fuel remained in the bottom of the tank after team officials had confirmed to race stewards that all the fuel had been drained out.

FIA have also handed the team a six month suspended sentence which will expire at the end of the year provided there are no further rule violations.

FIA president Max Mosley says BAR-Honda got off lightly.

"The team was asked to pump the fuel out of their car. They left 15 litres in the tank and told us it was empty," Mosley said reacting to the verdict.

"Under the circumstances, we feel they have been treated rather leniently."

The decision strips Button of the six points he earned for his third place finish and Takuma Sato loses the four points he got for finishing fifth, even though there was no indication his car had failed post-race inspection.

Alexander Wurz, who was filling in for the injured Juan Pablo Montoya at Imola, now moves up to third place while Canadian Jacques Villeneuve is promoted to fourth. Jarno Trulli is classified fifth, Nick Heidfeld is listed in sixth while Mark Webber and rookie Vitantonio Liuzzi - who initially finished out of the points - are now classified seventh and eighth respectively.

Liuzzi becomes the first rookie to score points in his Formula One debut since Timo Glock did it with the Jordan team last year in Montreal.

dom

The FIA INTERNATIONAL COURT OF APPEAL, composed of Mr Xavier CONESA (Spain), elected President, Mr Erich Sedelmayer (Austria), Mr Pierre Tourigny (Canada) and Mr Vassilis KOUSSIS (Greece),

Meeting in Paris on Wednesday 4 May 2005, at the headquarters of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile, 8 place de la Concorde, 75008 Paris,

Ruling on the appeal brought by the FIA against decision n° 49 taken by the Stewards of the Meeting of the San Marino Grand Prix on 24 April 2005, having refused to take any action against the competitor Lucky Strike BAR Honda who they considered was not in breach of the FIA Regulations as regards the weight of the car,

Having heard:

For the FIA, appellant, represented by Mr Pierre de CONINCK, Secretary General of the Sport Division, assisted by Mr Sébastien BERNARD, Head of Legal Affairs, and Mr Charlie WHITING, Head of the Technical Department,

For the Respondent, the Motor Sports Association (MSA), represented by Mr Terry Lankshear, Secretary General, acting both for the MSA and for the competitor Lucky Strike BAR Honda, assisted by Mr David PANNICK QC, Lawyer at the London Bar, Mr Simon TAYLOR, Solicitor in London, and Ms Caroline McGRORY, Lawyer,

For the knowledgeable parties, Mr Geoff WILLIS, Technical Director, Lucky Strike BAR Honda, Mr Craig WILSON, Chief Engineer, Lucky Strike BAR Honda, Mr Nick FRY, Chief Executive Officer (Lucky Strike BAR Honda), Mr Ron MEADOWS, Race Team Manager (Lucky Strike BAR Honda), Mr Alistair GIBSON, Chief Mechanic (Lucky Strike BAR Honda), Mr Darren BEACROFT, N°1 Mechanic (Lucky Strike BAR Honda), Mr Chris FRY, Team Truck Driver (Lucky Strike BAR Honda), Mr Yasuhiro WADA, President Honda Racing Development, Mr Otmar SZAFNAUER, Vice-President Honda Racing Development, Mr Nick BROOKES, Director British American Tobacco, Mr Jo BAUER, FIA Formula One Technical Delegate, Mr Kris de GROOT, FIA Formula One Technical Team, and Mr Alan FULLER, FIA Formula One Technical Team,

Having acknowledged that the procedure was in order and the appeal admissible, the rights of each of the parties having been duly examined, both in the proceedings which preceded the hearing and during the hearing itself, the appellant, the competitor and the knowledgeable parties having been duly heard and having provided all the detailed explanations requested from them during the hearing and having received answer, with the help of a simultaneous translation system which did not provoke the slightest criticism on the part of the competitors,

WHEREAS the appellant the FIA has requested the International Court of Appeal to cancel the decision taken by the Stewards because it did not respect the technical and sporting regulations of Formula One as well as the rules of the International Sporting Code,

WHEREAS for its part the defendant argued that it conformed to all the relevant rules above,

WHEREAS Article 1.9 of the same Technical Regulations stipulates that the weight of the car “is the weight of the car with the driver wearing his complete racing apparel, at all times during the event”, and must not be related with the weight of the car in ‘running order’ as defined in article 1.10.

WHEREAS with regard to the weight of the car, Article 4.1. of the Technical Regulations, without mentioning the fuel, requires that at all times during the event, whether or not the driver is weighed separately, the weight must not be less than 600 kg,

WHEREAS in this regard, the requirements of these regulations are supported by Art 77-a-4 and 77-b of the Sporting Regulations of Formula One which anticipate that the car must be weighed with the driver at the time of the practice, and that after the race every car crossing the line shall be weighed with the weight of its driver added, with paragraph c of the same article specifying that if the weight of the car is less than the minimum weight required by Article 4.1. of the Technical Regulations, the car will be excluded from the event, save where the deficiency in weight results from the accidental loss of a component of the car,

WHEREAS, taking into account these requirements, the car, at all times of the event, must weigh with the driver a minimum of 600 kg and that Lucky Strike BAR Honda tried to argue that the car must be weighed with the remaining fuel in the tank after the race, which is not supported by any rules of the Code and Regulations, and leaves the FIA as well the competitors in a regrettable state of uncertainty,

WHEREAS the only interpretation possible which can give any guarantee in this regard should be, as is contained in Article 4.1., that the weight of the car with its fuel tank completely empty at the end of the race, must weigh at least 600 kg, and this interpretation flows from Articles 1.9, 4.1, 77-a, 77-b and 77-c of the Sporting and Technical Regulations above,

WHEREAS the defendant Lucky Strike BAR Honda was unable to satisfy the requirements of Article 2.6, which states that “It is the duty of each Competitor to satisfy the FIA technical delegate and the Stewards of the Meeting that his automobile complies with these regulations in their entirety at all times during an Event”.

WHEREAS, the presentation of the team of fuel consumption data cannot guarantee that the vehicle complied at all times with the minimum weight requirements of Article 4.1,

WHEREAS, after having been drained of all its fuel, vehicle N°3 of the Lucky Strike BAR Honda weighed 594.6 kg, and therefore did not conform to Article 4.1 of the Technical Regulations, the only way in which the vehicle could meet the requirement of the minimum weight of 600 kg was to have used fuel as ballast, which does not conform to the requirements of Article 4.2,

WHEREAS the evidence submitted to the Court confirmed that both vehicles competing for Lucky Strike BAR Honda in the event concerned had the same specification fuel tanks,

WHEREAS the inspection revealed that on top of the 160 grams of fuel that was emptied, 8.92 kg of fuel still remained in a special compartment within the fuel tank and a further 2.46 kg remained in the bottom of the fuel tank. These quantities remained in the vehicle after the BAR Honda team had confirmed “That’s it” when asked if the draining process was completed,

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,

On these grounds

As to the form,

DECLARES and RULES that the appeal brought by the FIA is admissible

As to the content,

INVALIDATES the decision N°49 of the Stewards at the San Marino Grand Prix on 24 April 2005,

Giving a new RULING,

DECLARES and RULES that the Lucky Strike BAR Honda team failed to comply with Articles 1.9, 4.1, 4.2, 2.6 of the Sporting Regulations and also violates Article 151-c of the International Sporting Code,

EXCLUDES Lucky Strike BAR Honda team from the event in question,

SUSPENDS the Lucky Strike BAR Honda team from the next two events in the FIA Formula One Championship,

SUSPENDS the team for a period of six months after the above-mentioned two events, with this penalty suspended for a period of one year,

LEAVES it to the sporting authority to draw the consequences of the present decision while rectifying the classification of the event accordingly,

LEAVES it to the Lucky Strike BAR Honda team to pay the costs, which will be calculated in accordance with Article 190 of the International Sporting Code,

The PRESIDENT

Chief F1 Fan

I just read this too, only got it from the formula1.com site:


BAR will be missing from the grid in Barcelona this weekend after being banned for two events by the International Court of Appeal. It follows Wednesday’s hearing in Paris over the legality of Jenson Button’s car at the previous round at Imola.

As well as being unable to compete in the Spanish or Monaco Grands Prix, BAR will lose the 10 points they scored in San Marino for Button’s third-place finish and Takuma Sato’s fifth-place result.

On top of the two-race exclusion, BAR were given a further, suspended six-month ban, starting after the Monaco race.

Following the finish at Imola, BAR were asked by stewards to drain Button’s car of fuel prior to it being weighed and it subsequently met the minimum 600kg weight limit. However, FIA officials then found a further quantity of fuel in a secondary compartment within the tank. Once this was drained the car failed the weigh-in.

At the time the stewards accepted BAR’s explanation that the compartment, the legality of which was not questioned, was a collector tank which always held a minimal amount of fuel necessary for the car to function, meaning it would have been above the minimum weight throughout the race.

However, the FIA contested the stewards’ decision and the International Court of Appeal decided that while it could not find BAR to have intentionally cheated, the team’s interpretation of the rules was flawed and they should have sought clarification.

The Court said that the only way the car could have met the 600kg requirement was by using fuel as ballast, which is not allowed under Formula One regulations.

It also stated that BAR’s fuel consumption data could not guarantee that the car complied with the rules at all times during the race, hence the team neglected their duty to satisfy the FIA technical delegate of its legality throughout the event.

The verdict leaves BAR without any 2005 world championship points and unable to score any more until the European Grand Prix on May 29.




Fuck!!

Dan Martin

YBA

What is the 6 month ban? I don't understand what it implies...


Thanks

Chief F1 Fan

probation more or less, be good or it's yer ass

Edward'TLS

The verdict is out : A two-race ban. So out goes Spanish and Monoco GP's.

NOVAwhiteTypeS

damn shit, honda has had a bad fucken streak of luck.

F-C

I wonder if BAR will follow through on their threat of legal action with the civil courts?

I'm so upset, I might not watch the next two races at all!

gilboman

why? they cheated were caught and punished.

or are you a baseball fan where rampant cheating is great for the sport.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

or are you a piece of trash troll that just doesn't seem to die!

AztecRol

iTrader: (2)

CRAP!!

You know what else this means??
Jenson Button is gone. I know he
doesnt want to be with BAR, but
he is a dayum good driver.

Edward'TLS

The mystery remains. Who tipped off the stewards to weight the BAR after draining all the fluids ? Was it someone from inside the BAR camp ?

Edward'TLS

Jenson wanted to jump to team Williams. But Williams is not doing much better so far this season. Renault would be a better choice but it doen't want Jenson.

gilboman

BAR is a bunch of idiots, they cheated and got caught. and if you argue they were naive, then they more than deserved it, they have a huge budget with lots of resources but "forget" about the weight limit or thought it didnt apply to them

if it was any other team, you'll be singing a different tune

gilboman

supposedly it was a couple of exBar employees

seems BAR has huge management issues and has chased out all of its drivers that are competitive and want to be more than a sheep.

dom

@ Gilbo's appearance. You just won't miss an opportunity to bash Honda will you.

If it was Toyota you wouldn't be singing that tune Gilbo, and you know it.

dom

5/6/2005 9:02:17 AM

BAR-Honda has decided not to take any legal action against FIA following a two race ban imposed on the team by the governing body on Thursday.

"Upon receiving the best legal advice in all relevant jurisdictions, the conclusion is that nothing can be done to enable the team to race this weekend," read a statement released by the team.

"The team has decided that to challenge the sport's governing body would cause a level of disruption and damage to the sport which would not serve the best interests of everyone involved."

However, the team says it will vigoursly contest any insinuation that could potentially tarnish its reputation and good record and will publish all of the evidence it submitted to the Court of Appeal on its website on Friday, even though some of the information is considered highly secretive.

"The FIA International Court of Appeal in its own judgement was unable to prove that the team acted in bad faith. BAR-Honda therefore remains unclear as to the basis for such a severe penalty."

BAR-Honda team boss Nick Fry says the two race ban will cost the team upwards of $10-million.

Jenson Button and Takuma Sato were both disqualified from the San Marino Grand Prix and the team was banned from the next two races after Button's car was found to be underweight. Button and Sato lost six and four points respectively - their first points paying positions of the season - and the team was stripped of 10 points in the Constructors standings.

BAR-Honda will return to competition on May 29 at the European Grand Prix in Nurburgring, and depending what happens over the course of the next two races, both the drivers and constructors titles will likely be out of reach for the team.

The last team to be banned in Formula One was Tyrrell, which missed the last three races in 1984. The team was banned because the sport's governing body ruled that a performance aide was found in the water that was sprayed over Martin Brundle's engine air intake trumpets at the Detroit Grand Prix.