Renault get a 2 year suspended ban

There is a still a descrepancy in the stories here. Pay Symonds says that the plan was suggested to him by Piquet. Then Piquet says he regrets "following the orders he was given". :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

There is a still a descrepancy in the stories here. Pay Symonds says that the plan was suggested to him by Piquet. Then Piquet says he regrets "following the orders he was given". :mark:

---

I really can't believe that Jr has the intelligence to suggest anything so complex.

I have noticed that all we talk about on this thread is stories from all parties involved but no concrete evidence except telemetry, which can be interpreted in many ways. It is the case of 'your story' vs 'my story'. Here we have a disenchanted fired driver who said 'black', his former boss who said 'white', another boss who avoided saying anything and the team which pled no contest to whatever has been said by everybody else. I see no smoking gun here. I have no doubt that there was a conspiracy and many circumstances point at it indirectly, but from the legalistic point of view the court had no ground for passing such a severe judgment. I just don't think that's right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

I really can't believe that Jr has the intelligence to suggest anything so complex.

---

Eh? Crashing was his party piece, an artform perfected over many races in F1.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

It is the case of 'your story' vs 'my story'. Here we have a disenchanted fired driver who said 'black', his former boss who said 'white', another boss who avoided saying anything and the team which pled no contest to whatever has been said by everybody else.

---

According to the WMSC hearing (link):

Quote:

---

...this conspiracy did not go to the heart of the team, but was restricted to the actions of 2 or 3 people

---

Both Piquet and Symonds have admitted their involvement, although their account differs, so that's 2. The "or 3" presumably refers to Briatore who has indeed has said little.

Well, with Witness X coming forward, lets be honest here, how many more within the team knew? People talk, it's human nature.

While a convenient means to an end for Max to watch Flavio fall on his sword, I just don't buy the clique little conveniences that just seemed to have slotted into place.

If this Witness X was party to the Whistlblower policy - which you assume was a condition of contract of employment, why wait till the absolute last possible moment?

I am prepared to eat my hat if it transpires that no-one else in the Renault team new of this plot.

NB - I aint stoopid (only my opinion!!!!), I keep a chocolate hat for such wagers!!! ;)

if Flav were innocent why isn't he taking Renault to court for wrongful dismissal?

we also now have an additional Renault employee (who Renault found in their investigation, not the FIA's) - do people continue to believe that no-one outsde that room knew of the plot (even if it was only after) given the odd strategy, the Piquets loose lips and the prolifereation of data and suspicion.

and why is one person continuing to protest about Flav being so hard done by? a convicted criminal who avoided jail by fleeing the country before being given an amnesty by a no doubt entirely incorruptable organisation, a man who was at the helm during the traction control Bennetton days (in the car but not used my arse), the fuel rig tampering and now race fixing, to name a few issues with one thing in common - Flav. sure he's been successful, but all that can be questioned for what it appears to be based on - a desire to win at all cost regardless of rules or morals - what a shining example to us all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

with one thing in common - Flav.

---

Don't forget Pat......


[Sorry Pat]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

There is a still a descrepancy in the stories here. Pay Symonds says that the plan was suggested to him by Piquet. Then Piquet says he regrets "following the orders he was given". :mark:

---

There is also an argument for punishing Jnr here, as he has clearly been 'economical' with the truth - or his version of it.....?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

First of all, you are wrong in law: In France, he is guilty until proven innocent.

Secondly, you are the only person on earth who has any doubt about both Pat Symonds's and Sleazy Flav's guilt.

In fact, from the transcribe of the FIA's original interview of Pat Symonds, his evasive answers lead me to believe not only that he was well and truly involved in the conspiracy, but it gave the indication that if he was put under oath, he would have spilled the beans on Sleazy Flav.

As I said before, the only reason both Sleazy Flav and Pat Symonds are not on trial is because the were smart enough to depart Renault so that they didn't have to attend the WMSC hearing. It sure as hell wasn't because the FIA didn't want to interrogate the two.

---

I know very well what the system in France is which is why I said in FAIR justice systems. France's system is not right.

You can debate a decison whether or not it is a good one to decide against a trial - the FIA is capricious so it is more important what can be arranged before hand.

But I see Symonds has admitted according to a report in Autosport and he is saying he will "eternally regret etc". I am not surprised he turned out to be weak. He looks like a weak character.

Anyway, I still think that the decision to ban them was excessive.

And why Nelsinho decided to become a snitch instead of keeping Flavio as a friend and getting his help to seek another drive in f1 as his manager is also extremely puzzling. Maybe he has not learnt that burning your bridges is always foolish.

Well, its over and time to move on. This weekend is Singapore after all :D