Because he would have pressed the 2 button instead of the 1 button. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkmoon
Printable View
Because he would have pressed the 2 button instead of the 1 button. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkmoon
But the point is - should a person who is supposed to judge a case give ANY opinion before the case is heard? Right or wrong, he should be thrown off the council that will hear the case as he has already stated a biased opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
In the legal system he would automatically be dismissed if he was a judge or a juror due to prejudice. This must be seen as a fair hearing regardless of the outcome!
Do we know for sure he will be on the FIA panel? He may have just been asked his opinion of the case by a journalist, and as taburello has said he "thinks" but doesn't know...like the rest of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
p.s. strangely, this particular story seems to have been taken off the Autosport website :crazy:
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19406.htmlQuote:
It was a quiet weekend in the Formula 1 world with not much happening beyond more leaks in Italy regarding what was in Mike Coughlan's affadavit. It seems that this has been leaked to members of the Italian media by Ferrari- ostensibly the only people in Italy who have the document - although it may only be the parts that Ferrari wants the media to know.
Manipulating the press is all the rage at the moment in F1 circles but it might be wistest for all concerned if they either stopped leaking details and got on with the legal processes or made the affadavit available to the public. That way they will all avoid the suspicion that they are trying to use the information to create as much damage as possible to the opposition
more than just the wheels spinning in Italy :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Here's a question:
Why would Mike Couglan show "the document" to McLaren team members if the reason he had it was as part of a planned move to another team :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Maybe he wanted some of them to join him at another team. Who knows? Maybe he was just being stupid.
Sorry for my ignorance, but I don't understand the reason why Couglan had to make a copy of the full document?
Was he looking to send copies to someonelse or he wanted just to keep a copy in case the original document may disapear?
Maybe he was making copies from the Discs? But why he needed a hard copy is something that I can't understand either.
If he had to pay something to get a copy, of course the hard copy should be the deal!!! Just to make sure that he has everything with him?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
hey valve....theres a few earlier letters from Fernando to "Pedro".......ive read them but i still havent worked out how to post links yet coz i use my pc mostly for gaming,,,but theyre hilarious, even tho its takin the p!55 in a mild way.....i like the "lewis is a secret gangsta rappa when nobody else is in earshot" twist to the plot :) .....its as good as the "Ronspeak" posts on Atlas F1 forum!!!!.....at least we all still got our sense of humour about f1, despite some of the events takin place!!!....and pino.....i would argue that my posts are NOT "personal attacks" against ANYONES personal opinions on this forum, and i read as many as i can on all the different topics posted here;....ok....so sometimes i feel it necessary to post the odd swear word now and then because as a motor racing enthusiast talking about instances that could mean life or death for the participants in the actual "sport" we are talking about, i think it is my right to offer an opinion on behalf of my personal favourite driver. (iput a full stop there to shorten this sentence for you)...can i post your private message for all to see????....i dont know as im a pc gamer and dont really know too much how to use my pc for this application!!!!! but you state my sentences are too long, so im trying to comply!!.....i like the fact that an italian is more aware of english grammar than i am tho, despite my boarding school education and having spent 47 years living in England!!!!....i do neglect to put capital letters where they belong and i do not use colons or semi-colons where i should,because as you know, Europe is constantly changing during this period of cultural and migratory evolution, so i do not expect the majority of people from abroad to fully understand the intricacies of the English language!!!!. anyway....im not 1 to argue, and i have work to do atm, but we shall obviously cross swords at a later date, as i want to post your private message for a topical discussion as to what kind of post constitutes crossing the boundaries between being informative and compliant ,or what kind of posts are offensive and belligerent; and i have read the posts between flat and garry and the ensuing "debate" posted under the other topic ....and i do at least disguise my swearing with punctuation symbols, altho im not sure yet that anybody reading these posts is likely to be under 16 years of age and not already familiar with any "colourful" language that i might use!!!!....and i would be very interested to know at the very least your date of birth, if that is not being too presumptious!!!!....thx :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Nobody had a clue about the McLaren "tractor brakes" until a photographer who was standing trackside by coldturds car when it broke down at Spa/Monza????(i cant remember which), jumped over the barrier and took a photo looking down into the cockpit and noticed the split brake pedal after they developed the photo!!!!!!!.....this could have been from a dc tip off to 1 of his photographer mates, coz dc knows plenty of them i can tell you!!!and he knew thinmgs were getting hot in a McLaren seat when he kept fai8ling to deliver any decent results!!!!....McLaren stood still while couldturd was there!!!!how do you think schumi won 5 titles on the trot????....Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Pitstop.com reports today that McLaren also copied Ferrari 2006 nicking Vodafone stickers!
No one posted this yet:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60908Quote:
Nigel Stepney emailed McLaren's chief designer Mike Coughlan on the eve of the season to tip him off about Ferrari's movable floor design, this week's Autosport magazine reveals.
According to PitPass he is one of 26 members who will sit in judgment of the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Link:
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=32143
Ah and there is this part too:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60908Quote:
McLaren will face an extraordinary meeting of the FIA World Motor Sport Council next week to face charges of 'fraudulent conduct' over the possession of secret Ferrari documents from March to July this year.
Quote:
a reliable source has revealed
Seems to be a lot of them around at the moment
Would it be too presumptious to ask you to press "enter" once instead of "." 4 times ? :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehound
It might save a little effort on both sides :)
Monty Python to the rescue.
Elvis, it's Elvis; trust me!!
.......... :dozey: sorry guys :eek: ....just thought i would repost 1 of my posts from YESTERDAY! after just reading the latest Autosport news linked by ioan in message 524 :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehound
....sorry donkey..i dont have a clue what you mean about pressing enter 4 times!!!!...did i do something wRONg??????? :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by donKey jote
and he was 1 of the panel who sat in judgement at Monaco 06 as ioan is well aware :eek: .....not in your good books is he after his verdict in the quali :dozey:Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehound
That guy needs to be removed from his position in the FIA. As a guy that's suppoed to be an impartial judge of events, he goes into this meeting claiming that he thinks Mclaren will only get a minor reprimand and that "proving they copied parts from the ferrari will be hard". Uhh, can you get more stupid? There are dozens of ways to use the ferrari information without "copying their design" and only an idiot would copy their design as it becomes instantly easy to prove that the part was copied! Biased morons have no place on the panel. I'd like to know how he "proved" that schumacher purposely parked it up in monaco. What a complete and total moron.
Agreed!! let's go shoot out his kneecaps.
Hey, I'm not ioan!!! I don't care about Monaco 2006! I don't care what the guy's personal opinion is, I don't even care what the outcome of the hearings and trials are, I'm just saying that it is improper to state your opinion on ANY case you will be deciding. It doesn't matter whether it's in a court of law or a hearing of the FIA or your local city council! If you state your opinion BEFORE hearing the case, that's called prejudice. Those hearing the evidence in any case should be open-minded and not lean to one side or the other until AFTER they hear the FACTS (and ALL OF THEM!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehound
I wouldn't want to sit on trial in a court of law and have one of the jurors give an opinion about my case before the case was even heard!
We all expect the tabloid press to make judgments one way or the other and even those involved to make statements regarding their innocence or the guilt of the other party, but we don't need those who are doing the judging to express an opinion on the case before the proper proceedings begin.
I'm not commenting on Ferrari, McLaren, Stepney, Coughlan, etc. I'm commenting on improper judicial procedure!
A couple of things about this...if true then Coughlan was given info about the floor on the Ferrari. It wasn't stolen, or discovered by illegal means. It was given to him. The only thing anyone is possibly guilty of is a Ferrari employee who passed on 'trade secrets'.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Secondly, if there was a question about the legallity of the floor then what is wrong with anyone raising the issue with the FIA? Should we condone a potential breaking of the rules simply because of where the information comes from, or is an illegal floor an illegal floor regardless?
Forgive me Ferrari fans but it is the same every year when Ferrari are on the back foot, there is always some accusation, or complaint about another team, or some dodgy rulling that Ferrari never gets done for but everyone else does. Is the FIA that scared of upsetting Ferrari???
Anything to get points knocked off the other teams......I just had to get that off my chest. Thanks I won't post on here again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Is it illegal for a Ferrari employee to divulge to anyone that a Ferrari component is illegal?
sorry fella but if he was an impartial judge, he would not be qualified to be in the FIA :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hendersen
it strikes me as strange that IF TRUE, people arent picking up on this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
someone at Ferrari blows the whistle that they are using an illegal floor to McLaren, Mclaren do the right think and ask the FIA to clarify which they do, the floor is outlawed and the situation resolved.
now, the people that want Mclaren hung, drawn and quartered because Mikle was their employee and they are responsible for his actions should also be calling for Ferrari to be penalised for the ALLEDGED illegal conduct of their employee and that they were attempting to field a componant contrary to the rules.
now, I personally think this is all a load of horse sh*t but before you all jump up and down throwing stones, look at the glass house youre hiding behind first ;)
Brilliant logic.............just a shame it's not from this planet.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
The Ferrari floor, like Renault's Mass-Damper that you defended last year, was legal until the FIA changed the regulations.
However, stealing 'trade secrets' is a crime....as is receiving stolen 'trade secrets'.
Honestly Arrows, even as a Ferrari fan I'm hoping that Mclaren's lawyers/advisors are better than you at trying to get them off!
No, thats not the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
The Ferrari floor was able to pass the FIA tests, proving that it ought not be able to flex. However, it was designed in a way to flex under a load greater that in the FIA tests. That is against the spirit of the rules, is it not? And, moreover, if it can flex in excess of the tolerances laid down in the rulebook, it is thus illegal.
I have yet to see a safe testing facility that allows an FIA delegate to measure the floor while the car is travelling at 190mph...... :D
The MD in the Renault was only deemed Illegal because someone in the FIA labelled it a 'moveable aerodynamic device'.
I mean, just how can a device, tucked out of the airflow inside the vehicle be aerodynamic?
Just to give you an idea of the oik that is Charlie Whiting, the Chauffeur here in the office used to fit sunroofs for the garage one BE used to work at with Charlie. Charlie was so chuffing inept, they did not even trust him to do the MOT's.
And look what he is doing now.......
It passed the tests, making it legal. What it did on the track could not be classified as illegal because, as you say, it couldn't be tested.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
As for the 'spirit of the rules'....nobody has yet to be able to measure that either.
No, the shame is the need to dismiss anyone's view in this way :rolleyes: although it is easier to explain away a complex situation with oneliners than to discuss and debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I have no wish to try to get anyone "off", as you put it. What I would like to see is a discussion about what is, after all, a major news story in F1.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
At present the only "charge" McLaren have been summoned to answer (by the FIA) is that they "had unauthorised possession of documents and confidential information belonging to Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro, including information that could be used to design, engineer, build, check, test, develop and/or run a 2007 Ferrari Formula One car."
The "charge" itself raises more questions, none of which any of us have the answers to, and yet it appears that many have decided that McLaren are guilty of something/anything/everything and should be kicked out of F1.
Assuming someone is guilty, and then looking for "evidence" to support that "guilt" is hardly the right way to go about things. Or do you not agree?
IIRC, information about the infamous Honda fuel tank was provided by ex Honda employees who had moved to another team. Was that not also a trade secret by your definition?.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I notice you haven't attempted to defend your logic, which is hardly discussing and debating either so get off the high horse.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Not once have I said that Mclaren are guilty, just that the charges against them are not easily dismissed with half-baked and incorrect statements as to what crime has potentially taken place.
Nor have I said you are wanting to get Mclaren 'off'....just that your argument is piss-poor.
I therefore stand by the statement that your logic is not of this planet and it's to be hoped Mclaren have a better line of defence.
If you want to take offence, then that is your perogative. Of course, if you could debate and discuss with a better line of argument, then you wouldn't be putting yourself in a position whereby someone could fire off a one-liner, but again, that is your choice.
sorry, Im struggleing a bit with your interplanetary logic here ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
You seem to be mistaking legality with finding ways to get around testing. The moving floor was illegal but Ferrari constructed it in such a way as to fudge it through testing forcing the FIA to revise their regulation on testing. i can think of 2 very similar situations in recent history other than the ones quoted. Michelin had a tyre that was legal when measured (at the beginning of the GP) but afterwards exceeded the original tyre specifications and was subsequently outlawed towards the end of the season. At the time, Ferrari were struggleing but after Michelin had to redesign the tyre, Ferrari won the championship.
Honda had a fuel tank that conformed to the regulations although the FIA president publicly called them cheats before the case. this was apparently squealed on by some ex employees and the FIA sprung a bit of a trap. I have no doubts that Honda were trying to fudge the rules a bit but half the other teams were doing the same but Honda got the rap. Banned for 2 races.
Ferrari should consider themselves lucky that they got away with it :D
now, for your "receiving trade secrets" bit. Can you provide a link of exactly what secrets they received?
I understood that it was an email but did it have specific plans or was it a tip off for them to look at something dodgy? I dont know and neither do you so its a bit silly to claim someone is or isn't guilty without holding a scap of evidence. as it stands, it looks like Mike received some information pertaining to a team trying to enter a car that contravened the regulations, which it did, and they informed the FIA to ask for clarification. The FIA investigated and deemed that it did not conform to the regulations but did to the testing procedures so they modified them to take into account Ferraris inginuity the same as they did with Honda and Michelin.
The Honda case was rather different. I remember seeing a sketch of the system with it's special return valve to the hidden tank. This system allowed a car to qualify at lower than regulation weight, and run every stint except the last one on a lower fuel load than other cars, and run lighter towards the end of stints except the last one. If I remember correctly, during the weighing after the race, Honda was asked if the tank was empty and they said yes. The stewards then tipped the car up and more fuel was drained from the car. However, this did not prove, at any stage, that the car was in fact running light at any stage during quals or the race.
The FIA then got Honda for using fuel as a ballast. Not sure if any other teams had such a system.
I think this is correct, unless my Alzeimer has already kicked in tonight. :(
On Planet Earth, contacting a rival with information about your employees designs is breaking the terms and conditions of your contract, which is a legally binding document.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Recieving information from a member of another team who has broken his contract to give you that information is in breach of FIA sporting regulations and is, in itself, breaching the terms of employment with your team because of that, not to mention that you are complicit in industrial espionage which carries both sporting and judicial penalties
With regard to "You seem to be mistaking legality with finding ways to get around testing", something that passes the test, like the Michelin tyres you're trying to be smart with, is legal.
What it does away from the test is not illegal because there is no way of verifying it's illegality. All that can be done is that the rules regarding the item in question is changed/re-interpreted by the scrutineers and a new policy of enforcement brought in which cannot be back-dated.
Neither Michelin nor Ferrari were told they were illegal when they used the tyres and floor respectively, just that future use of the parts in question would be considered to be illegal within the new interpretation of the regulations.
Which is just the same as the Mass-Damper issue of last year.
Hopefully the next time you enter the earths atmosphere, that information will be of some assistance.