Printable View
I can't say I really blame him since it was his teams secret documents that were stolen. It does show that RD might think his chances of getting off with the FIA again are not as certain as he has been stating in public.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
A bit off topic, but I wonder how McLaren got their extra brake pedal through scrutineering? Didn't anyone notice an extra pedal in the car and ask, "What's that for?" If so, I would like to have heard McLaren's explanation for it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
It can't sit comfortably with Todt that a senior member of the Ferrari 'dream team' was the one who apparently stole them.Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
Todt and Dennis really aren't far apart in all of this. They each have an employee who has dragged their team into a right old mess.
Possibly, although it might indicate that he is well aware of the damage unproven allegations and insinuations are doing to his team and, in the wider context, to F1, so is trying to seek a solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
The appeal hearing has been set for 13th September, so we still have weeks of this to go yet :rolleyes: Two more GP's will be in the record books by then, and another takes place just days after the hearing, leaving just three races to go in what remains one of the best and most closely contested title race in years.
No, I'm sure Todt will have his revenge on Stepney at the trial in Italy. I'm sure Todt (and all Ferrari management) are angry about the whole affair, especially because it was the plans for THEIR car that ended up in the hands of a McLaren employee. I'm sure they will want to do as much damage as possible to persuade any future employee from any team against the idea of stealing secrets.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Right now, if a McLaren employee showed up on Honda's doorstep (just an example, pick any 2 teams you wish) with the plans for the MP4/22 I doubt any Honda employee would touch them.
thank you for your opinion that it is a false example but I dont agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
performance enhancing drugs are banned in athletics but people try and get around the testing process. flexible floors are banned in F1 but Ferrari managed to get around the testing process.
Both are illegal.
I do not have the rules at the time for the 4th pedal so cannot confirm your claim but its immaterial to a degree as we are talking about the current situation. Ferrari were found to have a floor that contravened the rules and the testing process was adapted to ensure they couldnt get away with it. would you therefore say that the floor was legal or illegal? I would argue that it was illegal and rather than penalise them, the FIA told them to change it or face sanction. do you disagree with this?
I suppose the example that can be given is that an athlete takes a performance enhancing drug that is not on the banned list and the governing body changes the list to reflect the new drug. The athlete may have got away with it up till then but has been found out and will be penalised heavily if he continues to cheat. I would have also thought he will be watched closely by the governing body as someone willing to cheat if he can get away with it ;)
Firstly, the Mclaren 4th pedal situation is not immaterial. It is cut from the same cloth as the Ferrari floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Both were an attempt to circumnavigate the regulations. One (Mclaren) fell foul of an existing rule, whereas the Ferrari floor needed an amendment to the regulations for it to be deemed illegal.
The Ferrari floor, like the Renault Mass-damper last year, passed the FIA prescribed test procedure at Melbourne, much in the same way that the Michelin tyres passed the test procedure in Hungary in 2003.
By the time of Malaysia, when the regulations and the prescribed testing procedure had been revised, it would have been illegal.........but it was no longer on the car.
As has been said before, if you are within the regulations, you are not committing an act of illegality.
If you believe that Ferrari were illegal in Melbourne, then by the same logic you have to accuse Renault of illegality in 2006 and all Michelin runners, including the saintly Mclarens, of being illegal pre-Italian GP in 2003.
But I don't expect for one minute your blinkers could allow your own logic to bring about the downfall of your argument.
And, just for the record, I don't believe that Renault were illegal nor that the Michelin runners in 2003 were illegal. They were smart, that's all.
IMHO Ferrari's floor is a side-show. Ron Dennis has already said:The issue surrounding Stepney's email regarding Ferrari's floor was looked at by the original hearing.Quote:
"Let me make it clear: McLaren did know about the whistle blowing matters in March 2007 - indeed it reported these matters to the FIA.
One reason for there being so much focus on the email (exibit #1!) is that it supposedly shows McLaren illegally obtaining confidential Ferrari information to gain an advantage. The FIA have not accepted Ferrari's argument that this was the case.
This is crucial because without it Ferrari are having great difficulty proving their accusations that McLaren illegally obtained and used the 780-page document (exibit #2!). They appear to have no evidence, other than Coughlan's possession, that suggests McLaren had any knowledge of the document, let alone used it in any way.
Ferrari need the email to be seen as a case of theft of confidential information used to gain an advantage, because, by association, that makes it appear that McLaren (not Coughlan) could have obtained and used the document to do the same.
Objection M'lud!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Not wishing to get legal on your ass, but that is not exactly accurate. Some might even say it is a gross misrepresentation, but I'm in a good mood so I'll just say it's probably an oversight.
The FIA did not hear Ferrari's argument.
The original hearing did not allow Ferrari to put their case forward. It was simply a hearing for Mclaren to answer charges from the FIA.
The appeal hearing will allow Ferrari to put forward evidence and for their case to be heard.
If you disengage the Ron-world view for a moment, it might help.
But the fact is that Stepney did go to McLaren rather than the FIA. This is no more McLaren's fault than it is Ferrari's.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I agree with Arrows. The floor is a side issue, pure and simple. I think it was stupid of Ron Dennis to have cited it in his response to Ferrari, because it does the rest of his grievance down. The floor was not illegal in Melbourne, pure and simple. As in several previous cases, it subsequently became illegal following clarification, a perfectly normal process.
I will be fascinated to see how Ferrari attempt to prove that their documents were used in any way by McLaren in any way that has proved beneficial to McLaren's 2007 car, race strategy, operations, etc. One thing I feel is interesting is that at no point has there, to my knowledge, been any suggestion of anything specific being copied or used, be it a technical development or something else — no 'smoking gun', if you like.
Fair point.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Although, had Mclaren said "We can't accept this because what you are doing is criminal and this is better handled by the FIA", it would have saved an awful lot of suspicion.
The fact that they happily accepted the information and used it in the way the did, knowing it had come from a criminal source, rather does shoot them in the foot when it comes to their integrity.