Printable View
This is apparently based on information gathered by Quest at the FiA's request - and Quest have a rep that goes outside motorsport (they were behind prior investigations into football corruption and the death of Princess Di, for instance). I doubt that "because Piquet Jr said so" is the whole entire reason behind it getting to this stage, somehow...
There can be no good outcome of this.
Does the FIA want to drag the good name of a major European manufacturer that has been faithful to f1 since 1977 through the mud?
And if this were true, what good does it do? It would cause the immediate withdrawal of Renault from f1 and the impact would be significant.
Renault ought to use its considerable political muscle to intervene - reach out to the French government and have them pressurize the FIA to drop this.
I can find no positive outcome for this - it is a loss all the way for f1.
Just let it be and move on.
so if renault were acting outside the rules then just sweep it under the rug to keep them in the sport? Sorry but a ridiculous argument - the question here is what evidence and whether there are grounds for a penalty, like McLaren you do the crime you pay the fine - to let renault off when there is evidence they have done wrong basically says cheat and u'll get away with it provided the economic climate is bad
Then what do you suggest?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumbo
The Mclaren issue you think was a good outcome? When teams have illegally poached others ideas for years? It was a political witchhuny against Mclaren and to fine a team $100 million was appalling - but you support that and an FIA that acts capricously?
Do you want to see f1 dragged down - even a big investigation would do that - and the real possible withdrawal of Renault by the firm and as they are unable to find a replacement for ING in 2010 because of the scandal?
And a scandal that occurred a year ago?
Nobody died and it is a ludicrous charge unless one is a conspiracy theorist.
What I think is that there should be a reasonable investigation when there is reasonable grounds. The most important thing is that there is no over-reaction, no witchhunt and most importantly an adequate penalty.
Political witchhunt aside the biggest problem w/ the McLaren case (which I didn't support) was the penalty imposed, especially considering that Renault guilty of the same offence got away scot-free a few mths later
I think, if this is true of course, that they will find a way to protect Renault name, Renault is a important team and engine supplier, they will probably try to focus more in Briatore and the other members involved in this...
but to no investigate just because of the importance of Renault is stupid, the sport need credibility and who break the rules like this must be punished... if confirmed this is the biggest cheat in F1 history!? so...
Then you would agree that there is a political agenda here from within the FIA - maybe Maxi boy - instead, of what ought to be a very quiet and carefully handled behind the scenes inquiry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumbo
But at the same time I cannot find any good outcome and that is why there is now such a loud public furore.
I love f1 and I have a fond regard for Renault and I would not like to see Flavio gone fromthe sport. So I say just lets leave it - there has been enough upset this year. :dozey:
Hopefully so!Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
They did drag the name of major European manufacturer through the mud 2 years ago and they were right to do it given the circumstances. And may I add that the end of the world didn't come back than and it will not come now either! :\
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumbo
You are accusing someone of having a hidden political agenda but in the same time pleading for cheaters to be let free based on a political reason?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
That's 'interesting'. :\
SD you brought up the notion of a 'political witchhunt' I was merely putting the whole topic aside - quite frankly my personal views on the matter are irrelevant to this discussion. Personally I would rather there was no case to be had, why - because it would show a manufacturer which has been 'true' to F1 since 1977 had been such.............if it turns out that they have cheated, and that Flavio was involved thus causing them to leave the sport then is that really so bad?
If Ferrari were in this position i'd be arguing for a full investigation and a just decision based on the FACTS, if it were McLaren the same and so on down the list of those involved in this sport. If a team cheats then they should be brought to justice. If they manipulate the rules in such a way to achieve their outcome without breaking any rules then we target the rulemakers - think Brawn at the start of the yr - why should ANY manufacturer be immune to investigation if there are reasonable grounds.................so far we have an investigation nothing more......if a ridiculous penalty is handed down then we should rightly complain and if Renault leave we are poorer for it, but if they are guilty then to let them off to keep them in the sport is ludicrous.
I think it is summed up nicely by Tumbo.
No one is above the law. Full stop.
Agree Tumbo...although if it were Ferrari or McLaren the two factions would be in all out war on this forum!!
I've read all about this but i still struggle to see how they will prove Renault did this aside from Piquet's testimony. And that's just his word. If an engineer also said the same under oath then things could get very, very interesting.
Evil Homer makes a valid point. The only person who can really prove this is PQ, and there is just no way he would be stupid enough to get up and say "yes I crashed on purpose" as it would have a huge impact on his own career tarnishing him as a cheat at the very least.
Piquet would be a cheat because he played the team game?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
The cheats in this case are first and foremost Renault for asking him to do this, I fail to see why you are piling it all on Piquet.
Ioan, nobody has been found guilty yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
There has been an allegation, and Renault have been called to answer a charge.
That does not mean jack. It certainly does not mean Renault have cheated, therefore nobody should state that they have cheated.
After the WMSC, then we will know. Until then, there is the basic fair principle of innocent until proven.
We don't know what "proof" there is. If any.
You're right. My bad, I should have used a big IF.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I don't think I did "pile it all on Piquet". I suggested that if this has any basis in fact PQ jnr is one of the few who would have evidence and that he would be mad to admit that it had happened. Have you been following the "bloodgate" saga in rugby? I could see PQ facing the same kind of witch hunt if it were to be revealed that he played a part in cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
My personal option is that this is all going to fade away but its fun to speculate.
To be fair, that crash looked suspicious already in the beginning. However, it would be strange to put your driver's health to risk by ordering him to crash, but on the other hand it's Flavio we are talking about... But I'm not going to guess more until more evidence.
Thank goodness that unfair safety car rule is gone by now.
Put his life at risk?Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
Since when is life at risk in a F1 car crashing at under 100kmh? Especially IF the move is premeditated and well executed?
There are stuntmen out there crashing several times a day because they are told to do so and no one seem to care much about their lives.
if you notice, jens said 'health' not 'life'. there is a difference, maybe if you read the post properly you wouldnt need to retaliate like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
and he makes a point. a crash like that, going backwards into the wall, could *Potentially* (low risk these days but even so....) do injury to PK's spine. Im not saying huge damage, but small injuries can be caused. ;)
OK. no one cares for those stuntmen's health, but cry about Piquet being in danger in what is the safest race car on earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateDanGTR
Of course it might happen that he is injured as well as it might happen that he falls of his bed during sleep and brakes a finger or an arm. ;)
Not so sure about the bold bit, is F1 the safest form of motor racing? thats another issue,Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
but you have a fair point, there is only a small possibility of injury, which is like I said, although id say you're more likely to be injured in an F1 car crash than a your own bed, unless some statistics can persuade me otherwise! :)
i have to say i am stunned by your POV Ioan. were you not the same man who wanted better crash protection after the massa incident?
To now be saying an shunt at 100 is nothing is quite a turn-around. I take it you have never gone backwards into the wall? Trust me; it hurts.
well F1 cars have much better rear protection than your normal road car, but injury definatly isnt out of the question, which is the point ive made above, but i would rather crash backwards in an F1 car than a road car (if both at same speed)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
Not talking road car here. Only thing I've ever shunted has been purpose built racing machinery - trust me it still hurts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
i'm glad i'm not the only one who sees this statement as outlandish, coming from the man who wants covered cockpits amongst other crash protection measures since Massa's accident and that no avenue for safety should be left uninvestigated if it can improve the safety of the drivers, regardless of the comparable risk.
Stunt drivers crash under incredibly controlled and pre-planned circumstances. they don't do what they are told, as normally they are the ones planning teh stunt and they are very much in demand for their skill and bravery and as such command a healthy wage and have a lot of say on how a stunt is done.
IF Piquet did crash on purpose, on a live race track with 19 other drivers attempting to drive the track as quicly as possible there are 19 other things that cannot be controlled, and on a tight, fenced street circuit, the chance of another car coming across a crashed car and becoming involved is pretty high - raising teh possibility of flying debris, cars etc. the car that crashed in front of Henry Surtees was not travelled that fast when it crashed in to the barriers, but circumstances where enough to rip a wheel off and we all know what happened there.
Piquet may have been able to "crash" relatively safely, but easily could have found himself in the line of fire of another car or sent a wheel flying into the path of another driver and we know how dangerous this can be.
IF piquet did go through with this he is a d1ck of the highest order, even if only going through with a team order. he can come out of this only smelling of . IF proved true then he should never drive competitively again, and the team should be chucked out if the guilt can be proved and traced. if traced to Flav then its goodbye. i'm not saying that Piquet should get more blame, but if involved in the plan and he carried it through then he should get every bit as much of the flak as the idiots who dreamed it up.
however, i still maintain that they will never prove anything, although thats not to say i don't belive that it could be true
You are mistaking a premeditated action with an accident.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
You are also mistaking accidents with premeditated actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinho
Regardless of what you believe we are mistaking, you were calling for Renaults head on a plate after realeasing Fred from his Hungarian pitstop with the possibility of a wheel becoming detatched from the car, yet you are also claiming that backing your car into a wall at 100mph is perfectly safe both for the driver involved, the 19 other cars, and most importantly (if I remember you previous argument correctly) the paying public who could be injured by flying wheels or bodywork.
I repeat - I am stunned.
You are stunned? I'm stunned too, by your lack of reasoning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
First of all he was not doing 100mph.
Secondly IF he was asked to crash the car than he was doing it consciously and was in control of what he was doing.
Trying to compare an accident with something coordinated by the driver himself is something we should discuss in a SF forum, if at all.
ioan talking out of both sides of his mouth again.
you were leading the clarion call for F1 safety, no measure should be spared, spectators this, cars that , in ad-nauseum, when massa had his incident and yet you come here and belittle a high impact crash by another driver that totaled his car,brought out the safety and could have injured the driver?
It's clear that there is a parallel universe going on here, one where massa exists, and one for others. LOL
Ioan;
Firstly - I would like to see your data that proves what speed the car was traveling at.
Secondly - IF Piquet did crash on purpose and IF he was in complete control he is not a master of time and space and therefore can not control the million other possibilities.
Thirdly - clearly it is pointless having a discussion with you on this matter because as no red cars are involved your powers of logical thought seem to have deserted you.
Peace and love (no autographs) :)
Just watch the damn video on you tube if you want to see the speed he had when he hit that wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
It is exactly as clearly useless having a discussion with any of you as you think you know the ultimate truth and don't even bother checking the facts.
If you think that a F1 driver can't crash a car without putting himself in danger than you are watching the wrong sport.
I won't lose any more time with you. Ignore list is there with a reason. Don't bother to answer as I can't read your posts anymore, from now.
No need to get angry dude. I disagree with you and you want to put me on the ignore list? Childish in the extreem. Anywho, as I said;
Peace and love bro....
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
and you are mistaking a controlled premeditated "crash" with a live race track.
to force a safety car the "accident" needs to be somewhere that is not safe to recover under yellows, and however well controlled the drivers could crash, they cannot necessarily control the trajectory of any debris, or a fluke where a wheel is pulled off and ends up on a live race track. however minimal the risk, the risk is there and if deliberately taken its totally unacceptable.
i accept that even piquet is talented enough to probably not harm himself, but he is not psychic and cannot control the outcome of 19 racing F1 cars coming across the site of an accident on a street course - i am stunned that you think it is an acceptable risk, knowing how small a piece of debris can cause significant damage and injury if hit at speed. see Brazil Alonso and webber a few years ago, see surtees at brands, see Massa at hungary.
just so Ioan can read this ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
Be careful or you would be in the ignore list too! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinho
To late. I'm really making use of the ignore list for the first time since ages and I think this will help all of us out of some stupid situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinho
running and hiding from a discussion while lounging in your own echo chamber is why folks find it hard to take you serious. It seems that whenever you get called out, your embarrassment leads you to insult, anger and then hide(..erm ignore list) rather than a sensible discussion of a difference in opinion. If you can't handle a discussion with different views then why bother coming here. You might be better off writing your own F1 blog and then reading it to yourself. Because no one here is interested in reading your opinions if you think this forum is not big enough for you to handle dissenting arguments. Just man up ioan instead of picking fights and adding everyone to the ignore list.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan