English
Italiano
Team Leopard issued this statement today, puzzling in many ways. Not so much because it denounces an alleged irregularity on the part of the KTM group-each manufacturer tries to gain advantage oper itself-but because it confirms that the role of the Technical Director, Danny Aldridge, is poorly implemented within the FIM regulations. As in the case of Ducati's front lowerer, the so-called "shapeshifter," which was duly homologated and then banned despite being within the regulations, Dorna and FIM are unclear in their application of the rules. Let's not bring up the sometimes laughable decisions of Race Direction (the latest being the long lap penalty imposed on Quartararo at Silverstone for the incident with Aleix Espargarò), but two coincidences make a clue. No professional sport can be handled so lightly.
Without going into the merits of the matter, let us remember that Team Leopard is a driving force not only in Moto3, but in the entire MotoGP: riders such as Quartararo and Mir, to name just two, have formed within this team.
(p.s.)
Leopard Racing’s point of view after the protest regarding the evident changes on the Moto3 bikes
On August 9th, 2022 Leopard Racing received the grounds of the final decision of the MotoGP Court of Appeal regarding the protest filed by Leopard Racing on May 29th, 2022. The circumstances leading up to the protest are summarized below.
At the end of the 2021 season, on December 23rd, a FIM press release announced that certain elements of the Moto3 bikes, such as the complete wiring and its connectors, including those of the handlebar push-button panels, the complete fuel pump with its regulator and the entire power system (electrical wires, pipes, and connections), had become performance parts with immediate effect and consequently could not be modified by the Teams.
This decision surprised us because the parts in question were exactly the parts on which, with the approval from the MotoGP Technical Director, Mr. Danny Aldridge, we had been working throughout 2021 in order to improve the performance of our bike. We had created a lighter wiring, a simplified and dedicated push-button panel that allowed better ergonomics of the bike-rider assembly, and a more efficient fuel pump and pressure regulator in compliance with the pressure limit imposed by applicable regulations.
For this reason, the day after receiving the press release, we consulted the Technical Director asking for explanations, as for our Team, altering these changes would involve not only a loss of performance, but also a significant economic outlay.
The Technical Director replied that the changes had been a request from KTM, to which Honda had given its agreement. He said that we did not have the possibility of using our developed parts, as the decision had been taken in 2021. So, from 2022 on, the manufacturers had to homologate the original 2021 components that corresponded to the codes included in the last part list filed in 2021. Also, Honda Racing Corporation received a denial when asking about the possibility of updating the specification of the new performance parts. Consequently, we had to hurry to buy the original 2021 Honda components and invested considerable resources in order to reduce the loss of performance due to the assembly of the original 2021 components.
Throughout the 2022 season, we realized that on all the KTM motorcycles and those of the other brands of the same industrial group, all the new performance parts (wiring, fuel pump and handlebar push-button panels) had been updated compared to the specification used in 2021. To sum-up, our rivals had updated these mentioned performance parts, while we had been told that it was impossible to do so. Due to such an evident breach of the rules, and following the spirit of the competition, the team decided that something had to be done.
At the Jerez Grand Prix, we asked the Technical Director for clarifications who, taken aback and evidently unaware of the updates introduced by KTM in 2022, asked us not to bring a complaint and to give him time to investigate the matter. We were certain that the new parts had only been used experimentally by an Ajo rider at the end of the 2021 season, and for this reason they were not in any of the parts lists filed by KTM in 2021.
During the Mugello Race (two Grand Prix after the Jerez meeting) we filed a formal protest against KTM and the other brands belonging to the same industrial group.
After the race, the Stewards Panel heard our motivations and listened to the Technical Director. After having heard the parties, the Stewards Panel rejected our protest informing us that the new KTM components would have been updated with the approval of the Technical Director, therefore as such had been homologated for 2022.
This answer left us astonished and having not one, but numerous e-mails in which the Technical Director denied (without any possibility of misunderstanding) to Honda to make the same changes granted to KTM, we decided to present the appeal, and we were referred to the competent FIM Appeal Stewards Panel. This second panel declared that they did not have sufficient technical skills to decide on the matter, and referred us to the MotoGP Court of Appeal.
It remains a fact that during a period of "Freeze of Performance" that has lasted since the beginning of the pandemic, KTM has homologated a different bike from the 2021 specification, so much so that everyone with KTM group bikes had renewed a large part of their spare parts.
On July 14th, the day after the hearing, the MotoGP Court of Appeal informed us that it had rejected our protest, and we preferred to wait for the document that included the reasons of the rejection (received on August 9th) before giving our opinion to the media.
Basically, we’ve been disadvantaged, and we consider that Honda would also have been able to update the new performance parts, if the Technical Director had not expressed himself in the opposite direction. When expressing this, the Court of Appeal replied that there had been "misunderstandings" in the communications between the Technical Director, Honda, and Leopard regarding the interpretation of the regulatory changes introduced in 2022.
The Court of Appeal considers the e-mails and other relevant evidence as mere “conversations between individuals” devoid of any legal value, in fact diminishing the pivotal role of the Technical Director and leaving the Moto3 in the sole hands of an ambiguous regulation that lends to countless interpretations. This has created a landmark precedent in contrast to what is expressed within the applicable regulations in the definition of such technical matters, but also within the long tradition of our sport (and, more in general, of motorsports).
Therefore, the Technical Director claimed to have authorized these updates and that neither Leopard nor HRC understood that they could do so, moreover our and Honda's care in discussing in advance with the Technical Director any changes made to the bikes was counterproductive, whereas the opinion of the Technical Director is apparently not binding and can be reviewed as needed.
Nonetheless, several doubts and unanswered questions persist, whereas it is a fact that not all teams and manufacturers have received from the MotoGP Technical Director the same guidance as regards the technical rule changes for the 2022 season. Indeed, as shown by the relevant documents filed before the MotoGP Court of Appeal, our Team and Honda Racing Corporation have been prevented by the MotoGP Technical Director to likewise implement the developed parts, whereas the counterparties were expressly allowed to do so.
Furthermore, we fail to follow the MotoGP Court of Appeal when it rules that the new performance parts are to remain frozen as from the 2022 season. As a matter of fact, when asked by our Team which specifications of the new performance parts should be homologated by manufacturers, the Technical Director replied that manufacturers should have taken the 2021 spec as reference for such homologation, and this because the relevant rule had been agreed at the end of year 2021.
Finally, from the documents submitted by the manufacturers, it became fairly clear that KTM, GasGas and Husqvarna had not submitted their Parts List, required for approval of its Performance Parts for the 2022 season, within the deadline set forth by the regulation, though without asking and/or being granted a deadline waiver or extension. Despite this has been duly raised and deeply discussed during the hearing, the MotoGP Court of Appeal's decision surprisingly does not take position on this matter, not even mentioning it in their final decision.
We therefore leave to the common sense of those who read our press release the interpretation of the events and the judgment on the subjects involved. We are back to work to continue improving our performance, and proof of it was the last victory at the Silverstone and the consistent fights for the podium positions. Likewise, we are just hoping that in the future no misunderstanding, or however one may want to define it, shall be able to influence the sporting result of an exciting championship like that of Moto3.
