FIA sends spy case to Court of Appeal

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

2nd August 2007, 18:20
Bagwan

I've already said that I didn't believe Ferrari's floor was illegal (others here disagree), but the FIA clarification made it so, and all the teams were required to make changes. Therefore, had no clarification been sought, or given, would the floor have been illegal? RD's view is yes it would, and given the FIA's clarification it's hard to disagree. Ferrari's floor was designed to exploit a loophole/omission in the rules and without the clarification it is reasonable to assume it would continue to have been used.

RD doesn't say McLaren needed to be told about the about the rear wing separator by Stepney. He does say both that and the floor "could be and were seen on the Ferrari car prior to the Australian Grand Prix".-ArrowsFA1

"Given the FIA's clarification it's hard to disagree" ?

It is for that very reason that one must , as you have stated you do , agree with the FIA and Ferrari(and others) that it was not illegal in Melbourne .

And , of course it would be used if it was legal . As soon as it was clarified they dutifully removed the now offending parts .

If Ron is saying that they were seen prior to the Oz race , then he might have mentioned it then , instead of throwing doubt on Ferrari during the season .
This rather flies in the face of not wanting to bring the championship into disrepute during the season rhetoric with which he is coming up .
2nd August 2007, 18:58
ioan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

So his detailed letter is not a response to the fact that Ferrari have refused to accept the FIA hearing verdict, despite being allowed to present their evidence and take part in the procedings, and have repeatedly made unproven allegations via the media without producing any new evidence to back them up?

Me-thinks you oversimplify things a little :) but Max has given Ferrari another opportunity. If they have the evidence then there shouldn't be a problem. If not...Well, let's wait and see.

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!
2nd August 2007, 19:10
icsunonove

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

Really? A team that has been the subject of espionage, betrayal and having their designs in the hands of their main rivals designer have been distasteful?

Whereas Mclaren's has been above and beyond reproach, as has Coughlan and your set-up mate Stepney?

Go on, keep them coming, it's entertaining.

I don't think anyone here would deny that Ferrari have good reason to be upset that their data was found in the possession of a McLaren employee. But as far as I can tell from all of this, that is all that has actually been shown. Betrayal, probably - espionage, certainly not.

There has not been any evidence presented that supports the allegations that Ferrari have been making to the press that McLaren knew about the 780 pages of documents before suspending Coughlan or used any of that information to their advantage. I'm not aware that Ferrari have even presented material evidence that it was Stepney who sent the documents (and he is still denying it).

So to begin with, McLaren choose not to say anything to the press and wait until the FIA enquiry is over but as a result are assumed by many Ferrari fans to be guilty of all the allegations that Ferrari are making. Now, when McLaren present their side of the story to the press the same set of people choose not to believe it.

No surprise there then, but nor should it surprise the Ferrari fans that a lot of other people don't like the way Ferrari have behaved either and don't believe that every allegation that they make is true.
2nd August 2007, 19:11
icsunonove

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!

Coming from you that is priceless
2nd August 2007, 19:30
BDunnell

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

I hate to break it to you, old bean, but your institutional bias isn't just showing, it's destroying your credibility.

It is possible for someone who favours neither McLaren nor Ferrari to have an opinion on the matter, and for that opinion to be that McLaren's version of events is credible in the light of the evidence available thus far. This is certainly my position. Would you accuse me of 'institutional bias'? If you did, you'd be wrong.
2nd August 2007, 19:31
Ian McC

If McLaren are guilty because one of their staff got hold of the documents shouldn't Ferrari be responsible because one of their staff gave them away? Not only have they failed to keep control of sensitive material but they've allowed one of their staff to pass these onto another person.
2nd August 2007, 19:32
Ian McC

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!

Amazing that you dare even post that!
2nd August 2007, 19:39
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

Funny how you believe him unquestionably....

Well it's easily disproved isn't it. According to Martin Brundle's account there were at least 75 people at the hearing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

....funny also that you were willing to have believed Nigel Stepney's claims he was set up (which, of course, Mr Dennis has now confirmed wasn't the case)...

I apologise for having an opinion. It seems you don't approve.

Stepney has consistently denied sending the 780-page document to Coughlan. In the light of that it is reasonable to question 'if he didn't send it, who did and why?' Also, where has RD "confirmed" that Stepney wasn't set up? How does he know? Why do you chose to believe him in this instance?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

....whilst dismissing Ferrari statements as not been facts.

So show where Ferrari have presented facts, as opposed to allegations, that prove McLaren used the 780-page document that were in Coughlan's possession. It is my opinion (apologies again) that Ferrari have used the media very effectively to damage McLaren, and I am not alone in that opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

Atleast we Tifosi don't hide our bias.

Good for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

I hate to break it to you, old bean, but your institutional bias isn't just showing, it's destroying your credibility.

My "credibility", and your opinion of it, matters not one jot, and concerns me even less. What I care about is an open exchange of opinions among those of us who are interested in F1.
2nd August 2007, 19:51
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by seppefan

Ferrari it seems will come out of this much the worse for making so many accusations when the whole episode started with them through no fault of theirs.

Ferrari cheated. Stepney blew the whistle. Ferrari realised that Stepney knew too much and tried to scew his integrity by making up the white powder story ( did anyone believe that at the time ?). Then Stepney behaved like a traitor in my view by passing all the docs to Coughlan ( if he did ). Ferrari now try to pass the buck onto McLaren. BS. Sorry but I really hope Ferrari get a wopping penalty for wasting time post the FIA inquiry. Can Brawn seriously return.......

I suggest you look up the definitions of "whistleblower" and "spy." You'll find that a whistleblower takes his concerns to the proper authorities while a spy takes his knowledge to a competitor for personal gain. Gee, which one of these definitions does Stepney fit???

Using your logic that Ferrari cheated with the flexible floor (although it wasn't banned until Malaysia) then perhaps we should go back and erase all the wins and points earned with McLaren's "2nd brake pedal." According to your definition, that was also cheating since it was subsequently banned.

The pot should be careful what it calls the kettle!!!
2nd August 2007, 19:59
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian McC

If McLaren are guilty because one of their staff got hold of the documents shouldn't Ferrari be responsible because one of their staff gave them away? Not only have they failed to keep control of sensitive material but they've allowed one of their staff to pass these onto another person.

How many times is this question going to be asked?

I'll answer it one more time (and hopefully some of you will read it or pay someone to read it to you if you're not capable.)

Should the victim of a crime receive the same sentence as the criminal? McLaren stood to gain from having Ferrari's data, Ferrari could only lose by having their confidential information stolen and used by someone else!

I chuckled a bit at your twisted thinking as to Stepney "giving them (the documents) away!" It's called stealing - theft occurs when you give something away that is not yours to give away!!!!
2nd August 2007, 19:59
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagwan

It is for that very reason that one must , as you have stated you do , agree with the FIA and Ferrari(and others) that it was not illegal in Melbourne .

:up:

Ferrari clearly found a solution that was not covered by the rules, and therefore not illegal. Teams constantly push the boundaries of the rules, and the FIA are constantly asked for clarification on technical issues. It's normal practice.

The only difference here is in how information reached the FIA that led them to issue a clarification, which in turn meant that every team (not just Ferrari) had to make changes to their floor in order to confirm to the revised test.
2nd August 2007, 20:04
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by icsunonove

I'm not aware that Ferrari have even presented material evidence that it was Stepney who sent the documents (and he is still denying it).

Except RD STATED that the documents were given to Coughlan by Stepney at a meeting in Barcelona!! AND that he was aware of the flexible floor in Melbourne which could only have come from the technical documents (which was months before he said that McLaren was aware of the documents in July.)

So I guess, technically, Stepney didn't "send" them to Coughlan and Stepney then was the "unknown courier" that delivered them to Coughlan.

Can you not see the changes in McLaren's/Coughlan's/Dennis's story???? Open your eyes man!!!
2nd August 2007, 20:10
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Stepney has consistently denied sending the 780-page document to Coughlan. In the light of that it is reasonable to question 'if he didn't send it, who did and why?' Also, where has RD "confirmed" that Stepney wasn't set up? How does he know? Why do you chose to believe him in this instance?

Read RD's statement that says Stepney met with Coughlan in Barcelona and Coughlan returned with the documents. Pretty clear wording from RD it seems to me. Why DON'T YOU believe him???
2nd August 2007, 20:10
tinchote

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

:up:

Ferrari clearly found a solution that was not covered by the rules, and therefore not illegal. Teams constantly push the boundaries of the rules, and the FIA are constantly asked for clarification on technical issues. It's normal practice.

The only difference here is in how information reached the FIA that led them to issue a clarification, which in turn meant that every team (not just Ferrari) had to make changes to their floor in order to confirm to the revised test.

Agreed. And then we have Ron Dennis, who we should assume knows more about F1 than anyone of us, saying that Ferrari's car was illegal. I can only think of two possible explanations:

1) Ron Dennis is a liar;

2) Ron Dennis is an idiot.

Neither of the options do a lot for McLaren's credibility.
2nd August 2007, 20:14
Ian McC

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

How many times is this question going to be asked?

I'll answer it one more time (and hopefully some of you will read it or pay someone to read it to you if you're not capable.)

Should the victim of a crime receive the same sentence as the criminal? McLaren stood to gain from having Ferrari's data, Ferrari could only lose by having their confidential information stolen and used by someone else!

I chuckled a bit at your twisted thinking as to Stepney "giving them (the documents) away!" It's called stealing - theft occurs when you give something away that is not yours to give away!!!!

Your blinked view didn't allow you to read the post properly, I am sure Ferrari over the last few weeks have been looking very closely at their security to stop this happening again.
2nd August 2007, 20:17
BDunnell

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

Except RD STATED that the documents were given to Coughlan by Stepney at a meeting in Barcelona!! AND that he was aware of the flexible floor in Melbourne which could only have come from the technical documents (which was months before he said that McLaren was aware of the documents in July.)

Could it really only have come from those documents? Somehow, I doubt it.
2nd August 2007, 20:31
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

So his detailed letter is not a response to the fact that Ferrari have refused to accept the FIA hearing verdict, despite being allowed to present their evidence and take part in the procedings, and have repeatedly made unproven allegations via the media without producing any new evidence to back them up?

If you compare the most recent letter with his previous statements you can see changes in things like the timeline, the most recent "fact" that Stepney gave the documents to Coughlan at a meeting in Barcelona? The "fact" that he was aware of the flexible floor and wing separator at Melbourne BUT was not aware of the documents until July? It seems that all the "new evidence" is coming from Ron and much of it contradicts his "old evidence!"

As long as Ferrari keep the pressure on, Ron keeps digging his own grave.
2nd August 2007, 20:34
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Could it really only have come from those documents? Somehow, I doubt it.

It would be an easy way to find out, unless Stepney told McLaren directly which would be a further example of espionage. It would be one of those things that's a bit difficult to detect by photography or simply viewing the car while in the pits.
2nd August 2007, 20:41
markabilly

Wrong

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinchote

Agreed. And then we have Ron Dennis, who we should assume knows more about F1 than anyone of us, saying that Ferrari's car was illegal. I can only think of two possible explanations:

1) Ron Dennis is a liar;

2) Ron Dennis is an idiot.

Neither of the options do a lot for McLaren's credibility.

RD is just trying to determine who is a true Maclarent fan who will always drink the Koolaid be it laced with cyanide or some other white powder, and be good like Hamie, do as they told, accept whatever he says as the ONLY truth known to man, and defend MacLarent to the bitter end. Very reasonable way to weed out the disloyal or fair weather fans and to confirm those like Hamie who "have McLaren in their blood.." as true believers
, .... :imubash:

I am still trying to figure out what he was doing in the shower with NS, putting that white powder in the pants pocket of NS..or maybe it was just :love: ??
2nd August 2007, 20:42
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian McC

Your blinked view didn't allow you to read the post properly, I am sure Ferrari over the last few weeks have been looking very closely at their security to stop this happening again.

So which part of my "blinkered view" was wrong? You see no problem with an employee "giving away" confidential information? You feel that victims and criminals should get the same punishment? You feel that Ferrari profited from having their documents stolen? You feel that McLaren could not profit from Ferrari's documents?

Which point was I wrong in? Please point it out so I can correct my way of thinking.

BTW - I didn't mention anything about Ferrari improving their security (which I'm sure they have done.)
2nd August 2007, 20:48
markabilly

Usuually the victim has already been hurt enuff by the criminal

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

How many times is this question going to be asked?

I'll answer it one more time (and hopefully some of you will read it or pay someone to read it to you if you're not capable.)

Should the victim of a crime receive the same sentence as the criminal? ..... away!!!!

Usually as in the case of murder, and even with theft, in these days the victim has already been punished far more than the criminal...in the old days, justice was an eye for an eye.... :eek:

You just got it backward, it should be should the criminal receive the same puishment as intended or already inflicted upon the victim.....and the answer before we became civilized was always YES, sort of like do unto to others...and other such nonsense
2nd August 2007, 20:58
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by markabilly

Usually as in the case of murder, and even with theft, in these days the victim has already been punished far more than the criminal...in the old days, justice was an eye for an eye.... :eek:

You just got it backward, it should be should the criminal receive the same puishment as intended or already inflicted upon the victim.....and the answer before we became civilized was always YES, sort of like do unto to others...and other such nonsense

That would be a strange punishment - have McLaren turn over all documentation of their car to Ferrari for the next 2 seasons. ;)

Better yet, make it public. It would certainly give us something interesting to read!
2nd August 2007, 21:05
Ian McC

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

So which part of my "blinkered view" was wrong? You see no problem with an employee "giving away" confidential information? You feel that victims and criminals should get the same punishment? You feel that Ferrari profited from having their documents stolen? You feel that McLaren could not profit from Ferrari's documents?

Which point was I wrong in? Please point it out so I can correct my way of thinking.

BTW - I didn't mention anything about Ferrari improving their security (which I'm sure they have done.)

Nope, you didn't, that was my point. I didn't say anything about victims, criminals or guilt, the point I was making was that Ferrari need to tighten their security.

Seeing as you insist on mentioning all this, if everyone is guilty as charged (anyone who knows the law feel free to correct me, I'm no lawyer :D ) then Stepney is guilty of theft and Coughlan of receiving stolen goods.

Oh and as Stepney doesn't seemed to have been paid for it then he did give them away.
2nd August 2007, 21:09
BDunnell

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

It would be an easy way to find out, unless Stepney told McLaren directly which would be a further example of espionage. It would be one of those things that's a bit difficult to detect by photography or simply viewing the car while in the pits.

'A bit difficult', maybe, but possibly not impossible. And the general F1 rumour mill cannot be discounted either.
2nd August 2007, 21:16
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian McC

Nope, you didn't, that was my point. I didn't say anything about victims, criminals or guilt, the point I was making was that Ferrari need to tighten their security.

Seeing as you insist on mentioning all this, if everyone is guilty as charged (anyone who knows the law feel free to correct me, I'm no lawyer :D ) then Stepney is guilty of theft and Coughlan of receiving stolen goods.

Oh and as Stepney doesn't seemed to have been paid for it then he did give them away.

I missed your point, then. Yes, Ferrari need to tighten their security (I would bet every team is doing that now.) One way to do that is to prosecute violators to the fullest extent to prevent others from thinking about it in the future. (Then there is always the "cavity search as you go home each night" theory!)

OK. Stepney "gave" the documents away despite the fact that they weren't his to "give" unless something turns up that shows he benefited in some way such as promise of employment, etc.
2nd August 2007, 21:18
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDunnell

'A bit difficult', maybe, but possibly not impossible. And the general F1 rumour mill cannot be discounted either.

True, but it's the source of the rumor mill that is concerning. Was it started by Coughlan or someone else in McLaren? We'll probably never know that one.
2nd August 2007, 21:23
BDunnell

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

True, but it's the source of the rumor mill that is concerning. Was it started by Coughlan or someone else in McLaren? We'll probably never know that one.

It could equally have been someone in another team, or a journalist.

Still, this is the element of the whole thing that probably matters least, because the Ferraris were not illegal in Melbourne.
2nd August 2007, 21:29
ioan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

:up:

Ferrari clearly found a solution that was not covered by the rules, and therefore not illegal. Teams constantly push the boundaries of the rules, and the FIA are constantly asked for clarification on technical issues. It's normal practice.

The only difference here is in how information reached the FIA that led them to issue a clarification, which in turn meant that every team (not just Ferrari) had to make changes to their floor in order to confirm to the revised test.

There's still some chance for you! ;)
2nd August 2007, 21:37
ioan

Here's Macaluso's answer to Ron:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61279

Short and clever.
2nd August 2007, 21:40
markabilly

Not strange but certainly fair

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

That would be a strange punishment - have McLaren turn over all documentation of their car to Ferrari for the next 2 seasons. ;)

Better yet, make it public. It would certainly give us something interesting to read!

Folks like us probably could not understand all that jargon anyway :dozey:
2nd August 2007, 21:47
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Here's Macaluso's answer to Ron:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61279

Short and clever.

Ron would do well to limit his words in a similar manner. His last statement had too many contradictions with things he stated earlier.
2nd August 2007, 21:48
markabilly

True maclarenut fan watch out for the koolaid...

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDunnell

'A bit difficult', maybe, but possibly not impossible. And the general F1 rumour mill cannot be discounted either.

as i said before RD is just trying to determine who is a true Maclarent fan who will always drink the Koolaid be it laced with cyanide or some other white powder, and be good like Hamie, accept whatever he says as the ONLY truth known to man, and defend MacLarent to the bitter end. Very reasonable way to weed out the disloyal or fair weather fans and to confirm those like Hamie who "have McLaren in their blood.." as true believers
, .... :imubash:

AND LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE a winner!!!!! And as the lucky winner you will recieve one copy of Mike's very own notarized affidavit after RD copied it at a local copy shop where he saw it but did not look at it

PS
I am still trying to figure out what he was doing in the shower with NS, putting that white powder in the pants pocket of NS..or maybe it was just :love: ??
2nd August 2007, 22:30
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

Ron would do well to limit his words in a similar manner. His last statement had too many contradictions with things he stated earlier.

Your advice applies equally to Jean Todt. If Ron's statements are contradictory, then Jean's throwing as much mud as he can in the hope some sticks :p

F1 is the loser :dozey:
2nd August 2007, 22:53
LTalbot

Seems pretty obvious that there is plenty of Kool Aid being consumed by both Ferrari and McLaren loyalists.
2nd August 2007, 23:08
wmcot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Your advice applies equally to Jean Todt. If Ron's statements are contradictory, then Jean's throwing as much mud as he can in the hope some sticks :p

F1 is the loser :dozey:

True, that's why I'd like to see all this come out in the open.
2nd August 2007, 23:43
markabilly

Hush UP and drink your koolaid!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Your advice applies equally to Jean Todt. If Ron's statements are contradictory, then Jean's throwing as much mud as he can in the hope some sticks :p

F1 is the loser :dozey:

Or you cant watch any Hungarian grand prix !!!

Man this is better than prowrestlin on Tv....body slam that little frenchman... :D
3rd August 2007, 00:20
Bagwan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

:up:

Ferrari clearly found a solution that was not covered by the rules, and therefore not illegal. Teams constantly push the boundaries of the rules, and the FIA are constantly asked for clarification on technical issues. It's normal practice.

The only difference here is in how information reached the FIA that led them to issue a clarification, which in turn meant that every team (not just Ferrari) had to make changes to their floor in order to confirm to the revised test.

There is a when as well , Arrows . How early did they , through Coughlan , know ?

And , I must mention that it was every team having to make changes ; that is , every team but Ron's . That does make a bit of difference .

Is that why any team may make submissions at the trial ?

The more I hear , the more guilty Ron and his team looks .
3rd August 2007, 00:44
Valve Bounce

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinchote

Arrows, as I said in my point 9, I do agree with RD that this has been blown out of proportion. And in any case this will end up being dismissed, because otherwise it is too big a mess.

In all fairness, I don't really understand Ferrari's position. Unless they are in possession of information that clarifies the situation and has not been released.

But I still don't like the way RD is lying, and things haven't improved with removing his drivers from the press conferences today :down:

I think the guy is over-emotional and confused.

However, I certainly don't want this whole schemozzle to affect what has, so far been an excellent year for F1. I still hope Kimi wins, but he is pushing shyte uphill now :(
3rd August 2007, 08:26
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagwan

And , I must mention that it was every team having to make changes ; that is , every team but Ron's . That does make a bit of difference.

It might if it were true, but the revised tests introduced by the FIA in April affected everyone.

The FIA introduced a revised test after Austrialia where the cars were tested without any of the supporting devices that were allowed to be fitted in the past. According to Autosport: "This comes amid suspicions that some teams may have been using these support devices to cleverly resist the FIA tests but then allow the floor of the car to flex up at high speed - improving a car's aerodynamics and therefore straightline speed."

BMW were one team to claimthat they had made no changes to their car as a result of this test.

In April, amid fears that some teams were still trying to exploit the regulations, the FIA revised the test again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmcot

....The "fact" that he was aware of the flexible floor and wing separator at Melbourne BUT was not aware of the documents until July? It seems that all the "new evidence" is coming from Ron and much of it contradicts his "old evidence!".

There always has been a clear distinction between the email highlighting the floor and wing, and the 780-page document. They are not one and the same thing, but for Ferrari to make their allegations stick they need to blur the distinction i.e. McLaren used the email so obviously they must have used the 780-page document.

The best Ferrari have been able to come up with so far is: "The difference between the two teams [in the world championship standings] is so close that it is likely that McLaren's superior number of points is a consequence of its chief designer having the Ferrari documents." (link) They say that McLaren had an "unfair advantage" and that Ferrari would "suffer loss of at least 5.5 million euro" if they lost the WCC and "suffer loss in respect of damage to the Ferrari brand".

That's all very well, but it all hinges on their circumstantial use of the word "likely" and the lack of evidence to date that backs up their claims. Perhaps we will hear evidence at the appeal.
3rd August 2007, 10:45
ArrowsFA1

“Curiouser and curiouser!” cried Alice

Quote:

Nigel Stepney has denied having told the McLaren team about Ferrari's use of a moveable floor device in their car at the Australian Grand Prix.

"It's not true that I revealed those irregularities," Gazzetta dello Sport quoted Stepney's lawyer Sonia Bartolini as saying on his behalf. "You only needed to take a look at the car to realize what was wrong, it was obvious for people who work in F1. At McLaren they knew without the need for whistle blowing."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61285

What next? :crazy:

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:30.