Renault get a 2 year suspended ban

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

No buts..... you're not meant to have your competitors documents and you should be penalised for it.

---

A grasp of reality will tell you that the 'spread' of rivals information has been common place since motorsport began.

You have to consider how the information was 'procured', what was the rationale and who was the instigator(s).

Then consider fixing a race, and the wider implications that has......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

What I mean is, the fact that the Renault F1 Team fixed a race, conspiring with their driver(s) Piquet in so doing, has provided the fuel for Max to punish Flavio.

If it was more about handing down sensible punishments and deterrants, regardless of whether Renault may or may not exit the sport, then appropriate measures - docking of points, monetary fine etc - is what should have been given.

---

But as Ozrevhead said they've punished the people responsible and Renault weren't shown to have any part in it and they've got a ban hanging over them. If they offend again that's it. Surely that's pretty serious......

As for Max's motivations? Who gives a ..... we've got rid of Flab.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

A grasp of reality will tell you that the 'spread' of rivals information has been common place since motorsport began.

You have to consider how the information was 'procured', what was the rationale and who was the instigator(s).

Then consider fixing a race, and the wider implications that has......

---

and that it should be punished whenever infringements of note are found. Teams are allowed to draw their own conclusions from pictures and the like but actual industrial espionage? Non.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

and that it should be punished whenever infringements of note are found. Teams are allowed to draw their own conclusions from pictures and the like but actual industrial espionage? Non.

---

So, lets look at the two different scenarios;

An individual(s) of team A is contacted by an individual of team B with the offer of technical info...... .........as a result the ENTIRE team is fined $100m.

then

Individuals of team C conspire to fix a race for the benefit of their star driver, in so doing earning valuable points and race prize money, depriving others of doing so legitimately, and then gain extra prize money for artificially finishing higher in the constructors championship....... .......as a result the ENTIRE team receives a cursory wrap on the knuckles.

Remember also that we don't actually have proof that Flavio was the guy that asked Piquet to crash. All we know thus far is that a meeting took place between Flavio, Piquet and Symmonds.

Remember also that the one thing Piquet was good at was crashing....

Convenient, was a deal struck?

Who knows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

So, lets look at the two different scenarios;

An individual(s) of team A is contacted by an individual of team B with the offer of technical info which team A then discussed between a number of employees and then made an effort to conceal and then when it came to trial they protested that they were innocent even though they knew damn well that wasn't the case...............as a result the ENTIRE team is fined $100m when they should have been banned for being a bunch of lying little twonks.

---

Edited your post for you so it makes more sense :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

What I mean is, the fact that the Renault F1 Team fixed a race, conspiring with their driver(s) Piquet in so doing, has provided the fuel for Max to punish Flavio.

---

But had the race-fixing not occurred, there would have been no way for Max to get rid of Flavio; and even if Flavio and the FIA boss didn't hate each other, Flavio would have had to quit as a result of the race-fixing scandal. So the personal animosity between them surely hasn't had any bearing on the actual outcome?

By the way, does anyone else think that it would possibly be impossible to discuss a subject involving a more grubby set of people — Flavio Briatore, Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley? Urgh.

Where is the evidence? I'm sure that they are guilty as hell but is there a smoking gun? I have read the transcript Briatore mocking Piquet after the crash but that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

McLaren have a Ferrari dossier that was not used on car development...

---

Yes they did. That's why when the FIA checked the new car design in December 2007 they've found at least 3 systems copied from the F2007 and McLaren were asked to change those systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

So, lets look at the two different scenarios;

An individual(s) of team A is contacted by an individual of team B with the offer of technical info...... .........as a result the ENTIRE team is fined $100m.

then

Individuals of team C conspire to fix a race for the benefit of their star driver, in so doing earning valuable points and race prize money, depriving others of doing so legitimately, and then gain extra prize money for artificially finishing higher in the constructors championship....... .......as a result the ENTIRE team receives a cursory wrap on the knuckles.

Remember also that we don't actually have proof that Flavio was the guy that asked Piquet to crash. All we know thus far is that a meeting took place between Flavio, Piquet and Symmonds.

Remember also that the one thing Piquet was good at was crashing....

Convenient, was a deal struck?

Who knows?

---

As I said before, what's the point in attempting to draw any parallels — moral, legal or otherwise — between the two cases, or seek any precedents that resulted from the McLaren one? The cases are totally different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Edited your post for you so it makes more sense :)

---

:up: