Perhaps when he was quoted, he might have known the faecal matter was inevitably going to hit the rotating blade air cooling device at some future point........Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Printable View
Perhaps when he was quoted, he might have known the faecal matter was inevitably going to hit the rotating blade air cooling device at some future point........Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
they waited waay to long for this one I know exactly why too but If I say it I will get into a whole **** war with all the Ferrari fans :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I would like to add yet again that yes there is precedent regarding how to deal with Renault over this latest spy scandal:
As found on grandprix.com:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JULY 26, 2007
No punishment for McLaren F1 team
The World Council gathers
© FIA Media
The FIA World Motor Sports Council has decided not to impose any penalty on McLaren. The FIA said after the hearing that it would pursue action against Coughlan and Ferrari engineer Nigel Stepney.
The governing body said that there was no doubt that the team's chief designer Mike Coughlan had had the leaked information but there was no proof that McLaren had benefited from it.
The FIA reserved the right to summon McLaren again if it was suspected that the team had made use of any of the data.
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19454.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is this such a hard concept? It wasn't until the so called communications between the drivers that proved that their was atleast some intent to use the data that the book was thrown at McLeran, Renault and Flav are insisting that they did not benefit at all by having the Mcleran designs:
As found on speed (and probably everywhere else but Grandprix.com (wonder why?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"“We gave to [FIA President Max] Mosley all the correspondence and the evidence and a statement from our engineers making clear we never used any McLaren system in our car."
"I am confident the information was not used, and not only me. We have witness statements from every engineer that was involved and, categorically, everybody says that there was no influence of any of these things on the design of our car."
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/41550/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
So assuming that Flav isn't pulling a Ron Dennis and lieing threw his teeth, based on precedent, should Renault get the same original punishment as MacLeran did?
Well put, much better than the most recent opinion piece on GrandPrix.com, where he suggests the only option is to give them a $100M fine. He's turned into a Mac cheerleader... he's lost a lot of credibility on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSfan
Your opinion was excellent though... I think they should likely get the same ORIGINAL punishment as the Mac did.
PS: We see the difference between having Ferrari data (Mac turned into reliable world beaters from also rans the year before) and Renault who went from world beaters to pud beat... well you get the idea, when they had some Mac data from the previous / pre-Ferrari year. LOL - OK it's a joke some of you, don't get all riled up!
Good one! ;) :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by GP-M3
I'm sure Flav and Max are going to play for the original "punishment". However that was based on no evidence that the dossier really got into the team, it was just briefly shown to Jonathan Neale who immediately told him to get rid of it. It was not that it couldn't be seen in the car, that was still the case at the second hearing when they got the points taken away and the $100m fine. The no-punishment case was that only Coughlan had the dossier, and the team were guilty only in the technical sense, that they are automatically responsible for the behaviour of their staff.
The difference is that Renault had the data in their computer system, it was widely viewed and was there for 8 months.
So Max has work to do.
But beyond viewing, was it tested or used too? Does any driver have certain emails they would like to share with us??? :idea:Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
Well OK, the emails are an extra factor but they didn't lead anywhere in particular. The gas was never tried and the weight distribution couldn't be used. There was some stuff about pitstops but nothing to show that the Ferrari data were "used", on the car.Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
Renault can't really improve on this. They can say they haven't used the data, but they only end up in the same situation as McLaren, at best. The data were all over the engineering department.
For me the fact that they left the data hanging around for so long, and let so many people in on it, shows that in F1 this is just normal. But the McLaren precedent is there for the WMSC, and even if Max makes some clever arguments he'll struggle to stop the headlines saying "bias" unless Renault do get a similar penalty.
We are waiting to know how all this has been proved!Quote:
Originally Posted by passmeatissue
I am not entirely sur ethat the use of Ferrari data CAN be proved, can it.....?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
And now, as the situation stands, it looks as if the FIA team looking at the 2008 McLaren for Ferrari ideas (that one still makes me snigger), are going to have to divide their time between Woking and now Enstone - looking for McLaren ideas in the 2008 Renault.
That immortal line from Blazing Saddles "Darn it Mr Lamar Sir, you use your tongue prettier than a $20 dollar whore" really, IMO, ought to apply to Max!!!!!