Ross Brawn defended his team as innovators rather than cheats as the diffuser row reached the FIA's Court of Appeal on Tuesday.
Team boss says diffuser design is "innovative"
Brickbats were hurled at the FIA's International Court of Appeal on Tuesday as Ross Brawn defended his team as innovators rather than cheats.
Brawn, whose Brawn GP outfit has risen from the ashes of Honda's withdrawal from Formula One to dominate the opening two races of the season, faced a grilling as the diffuser row was finally heard in Paris.
The QC representing Ferrari, one of four teams protesting the cars of Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams, even went so far as to describe Brawn - who helped mastermind the Scuderia's dominance of the sport when Michael Schumacher drove for them - as "a person of supreme arrogance".
However, F1's newest boss gave as good as he got - Brawn's personal submissions revealing criticisms of ex-Ferrari colleague Rory Byrne and Red Bull designer Adrian Newey.
Together with Renault and BMW Sauber, Ferrari and Red Bull squared up to Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams in a sitting, held in front of five judges, that lasted over eight hours.
Central to the debate was the 'double-decker' rear diffuser design used by Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams - more specifically two apertures employed in the aerodynamic device that assist airflow, so increasing downforce/grip and therefore speed.
Brawn denied his team's diffuser broke FIA rules, saying: "We didn't consider this to be a radical new design.
"It was an innovative approach of an existing idea, and Formula One is all about innovative design. It's a cornerstone and objective of the sport."
FIA technical director Charlie Whiting was also cross-examined, during which he and world motorsport's governing body were both accused of "getting it wrong, and not understanding the point".
Baffling
Ferrari's legal representative, Nigel Tozzi QC, did his best to tie Whiting up in knots with regard to the finer points of the regulations.
He argued that "the position of the FIA is totally baffling...we urge you to save the FIA from itself".
However, the complexities of F1's technical loopholes also seemed to baffle the judges - one of whom, Malta's Guido de Marco, occasionally nodded off.
Paul Harris, representing Brawn GP, noted: "What we have seen is a sideshow, irrelevancies, or to coin an English phrase, a red herring."
Brawn's assertion that the history of F1 is littered with such cases also took a twist when he made reference to a number of cars - including Ferraris - from recent years which could be construed as contrary to the regulations.
Williams CEO Adam Parr remarked: "I find it almost pleasurable to hear Ferrari say they have won 11 world championships (drivers' and constructors') with an illegal car."
Tozzi also attempted to use recent moves to cut costs in the sport against Brawn by citing a remark made recently by FIA president Max Mosley.
"It was he who said recently that costs must be reduced by limiting the opportunities for technical innovation," Tozzi said.
"If the appeal is dismissed then the claims by the FIA they want to make the sport more attractive and reduce costs will sound hollow."
Personal
On a more personal level, Tozzi said of Brawn that "only a person of supreme arrogance would think he is right when so many of his esteemed colleagues would disagree".
Brawn offered criticisms of his own, made in personal submissions, about Byrne and Newey, in which he claimed the appellants' case was "a vindictive response...that amounted to a fishing expedition".
Asked to withdraw his comment as it was claimed it served as a slight against former Ferrari designer Byrne - with whom he won five drivers' and six constructors' titles between 1999 and 2004 - Brawn said: "I have the highest regard for Mr Byrne.
"But we are on opposite sides in this argument, so I stand by my statements."
He also accused Newey of "being unethical and of bringing the sport into disrespute" after the latter had claimed in his own statement that the speed of Brawn GP's car was a safety concern.
Brawn rebutted: "The safety implication relating to a technical feature of the car is a bit below the belt."
But when asked to renounce his words, Brawn replied: "No.".
The judges will now deliberate on a ruling made by the stewards at the Australian Grand Prix that the Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams cars are indeed legal.
A verdict is due on Wednesday, although their full findings are not due to be revealed until either later this week or early next.
At stake are the race results in Melbourne and Malaysia as the judges have the power to overturn them, although such an eventuality is not expected.
