:D Surprised Bernie hasn't thought of this already!! "PRO WRESTLING F1 STARS!!" kinda has a ring to it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
Printable View
:D Surprised Bernie hasn't thought of this already!! "PRO WRESTLING F1 STARS!!" kinda has a ring to it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
It all serves to make me even more certain that the moving floor is an entirely separate issue.
But you must admit that the possibility exists that the information came from the documents.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Conversely, if McLaren had never received the documents, that possibility would not exist.
Can someone who knows about these things (as opposed to someone who has an opinion) clear something up for me?
I was under the impression that, in France, the law assumed you were guilty until proved innocent unlike many countries where innocence is presumed until guilt is proven. Is the the case?
If so, does that presumption of guilt apply to rulings of the FIA which is, after all, based in Paris?
Thanks in advance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trevortherevver
Good point!! Let's string Ron Dennis up now and ask questions later.
Sorry!! I just woke up from my mid day nap.
I have to agree with Flavio in his latest comments that this whole thing reaches a final conclusion in the Appeals Court. My biggest fear is that if McLaren are punished by the court, will we have another appeal? This could go on forever...but let's hope not.
Information regarding Ferrari's floor did come from an email received by Coughlan. That is not in dispute, and is something that McLaren have acknowledged.Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
The issue of the 780-page document which was either sent or handed to Coughlan is a different issue and, in my opinion, should be seen in the light of Stepney & Coughlan making plans to move elsewhere, possibly to Honda. McLaren have consistently denied having any knowledge of this document before the 3rd July.
It is being argued that as McLaren used the email, there is the possibility that they would be prepared to use the document as well and yes, that possibility does exist. Obviously, as far as Ferrari are concerned, the document contained confidential information that could be helpful to any rival.
Ron Dennis has consistently denied that McLaren saw, let alone made use of, this document. Nick Fry has also said nothing was shown to him at meetings with Stepney/Coughlan. Why should one be believed and not the other? The common link between the two is Stepney/Coughlan's possession of a Ferrari document.
"Ron Dennis on Saturday said his Ferrari counterpart Jean Todt turned down an offer to settle the espionage scandal away from the courts."
http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlin...04204508.shtml
Stupid Ron, what does he think!! espionage, possible gaining advantage on track and he thinks ferrari will settle that ofcourt?
They want Mclaren to be kicked out or at least point reduction. Doesn't make mclaren case more credible if they got nothing to hide. It also contradicts their own statements that they are confident in the end they will be cleared.
And how the hell does a espionage case get settled? this is to serious to be settle out of court.
Has anyone heard of another issue Ferrari have with Maclaren, relating to the Vodafone decals on the Mac cars?
Another thing I don't understand is why Coughlan was given a 780 page document on paper.
All the information would have been stored at Ferrari in electronic form and putting together 780 pages of stuff sounds like hard work. It would have been much easier to burn it all to a DVD. Smaller and lighter to smuggle out of the office that way.
Of course, if they had done that to start with, or the Coughlans had bought a cheap scanner, we would never of heard about this affair.
Ron was caught lying at Hungary already, lets hope they catch him at the Court of Appeal too
Only a bit of a spoof by PitPass.comQuote:
Originally Posted by DonnieDarco
Sounds like Ron is becoming desperate. With the espionage case, his out-of-control drivers, and the penalty in Hungary, he seems to be losing control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daika
Maybe he should offer LH to Ferrari if they will settle out of court! :)
Let's have a seat in a corner of cafe, and talk?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daika
:s mokin:
Why should be getting desperate, they are one-two leading ;)
I guess it's more like "I'll pay you this", or "I'll give you this" :DQuote:
Originally Posted by leopardsleeping
usually, but this time Dennis was asking and Todt is to pay :DQuote:
Originally Posted by tinchote
Desperate...or practical? Stepneygate has already damaged both McLaren and F1 through allegations, implied irregularities, but little fact. Therefore it is in the interests of McLaren, and F1, for it to be resolved.Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
Unfortunately, by his response, Jean Todt has done nothing to dispel the suggestion that Ferrari want to inflict maximum damage on their championship rivals.
Arrows, there is nothing "practical" in lying the way he did this weekend and regarding the Stepney-gate. The account of Saturday afternoon at the McLaren centre, together with the lies, show that RD is not doing very good PR lately.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
What lies regarding Stepneygate? So McLaren had a shambolic pitstop during qualifying, and an equally shambolic press conference. Good for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by tinchote
I was referring to RD's comment that "we hope and would like to find a solution between the teams as opposed to one that is the subject of a more aggressive and damaging process for Formula One."
That is a practical approach what is becoming a bigger and bigger mess for F1 as a whole. It's as if the origins of this whole thing don't matter at all any more. The media are loving it and feeding off the whole thing like a pack of wolves, and forums like this are no better.
this is what Ive been trying to get across all along. within McLaren, Ferrari and the FIA, it was known that they were 2 seperate issues. the problem is that Todt (or whoever leaked information to the Itallian press) kept trying top make out that it was all one thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
email about floor = whistleblowing = no problem
780 page dossier = MC and NS acting alone in their best interests.
Actually, it's a big problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Had the whistle been blown in the direction of the FIA, then there would be no problem.
Much as he would love to be the sole arbitor of all things, Ron Dennis is not the head of organising body of world motorsport and therefore his organisation was the incorrect recipient.
Well, it is a practical approach if your name is Ron.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
come on man, it would have been practically impossible to have taken it to the FIA. it has more leaks than a fishnet condom.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
if Nigel wanted to blow his brains out, then confidentially going to the FIA was a good first step.
this way, he could remain incognito.
I suppose it would have been better if nobody mentioned that Ferrari had found a way to bypass the rules wouldnt it ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Arrows, RD's lies go well beyond last weekend. He publishes this letter where he keeps saying "Ferrari run an illegal car in Australia", and that what Stepney did was the perfect thing (that you tell about your company's wrongs to the competition and not to the authorities). And after that he wants to sit down with Todt and talk? :mark:
I'm interested in your sources for this. Year after year, the FIA holds confidential information from all the teams, and constantly mantains confidential communication with the teams regarding their car development. And now you know that they leak information :rolleyes: Care to mention any example?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
well, we have members prejudging the outcome of a hearing before it occurs, ITV commentators being given inside information about a closed hearing after the fact, members claiming they opposed the verdict in contradiction to the official statement and thats just this story. lets not go into EU investigations into anti-trust, extortion, abusing dominant position, imposing unreasonable restrictions etc, etc, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by tinchote
Firstly, the Ferrari floor was legal. It was within the rules as they were written at the time. Subsequently, the rules were re-written, making the floor illegal had it been used again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Since you need a basic lesson in legal affairs, here is a simple and basic legal point taught to under-graduate lawyers on day one.....
If you commit an act that later becomes illegal, you cannot be charged with committing a crime.
Even the least learned of the legal profession could tell you that. It appears that only you and Ron Dennis don't understand, but anyway....
Since the Ferrari floor was, according to yourself and Ron Dennis illegal and therefore an attempt to cheat, even though it passed scrutineering at Melbourne, it therefore has to be your logic that Mclaren's 4-pedal brake/steer system was also illegal and an attempt to cheat.
Evidence that your beloved Ron is capable of bending the rules, unless of course a different set of values are applied.
Which wouldn't surprise me.
Secondly, it is laughable beyond contempt for Ron and you to argue that it was better to go to the opposition than to the governing body.
Ron Dennis signed the Concorde Agreement, then happily breaks it when it suits him, and you still try to tell us he is honest and credible.
Yeah, right.
No wonder Todt and Ferrari don't want to help.
get personal if you want sweetheart :kiss: but lets just blow some holes in the Itallian propaganda you spout.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Was the floor illegal? YES. It contravened the rules. the reason it got through scruitenering is that it contravened the rules in a way that didn't show up in the tests in place.
Question! An athlete takes a new type of performance drug that does not show up on the tests. Is he breaking the law and cheating?
Answer. YES as was proved a couple of years ago with a performance enhancing drug that was not identifyable as it had been engineered to not show up.
They were breaking the rules and hoping not to get caught just as Ferrari were. they were totally against the spitit of the rules just as Ferrari were.
as for McLarens pedal, then there was nothing in the rules about it. It wasn't a test that they managed to fudge but an innovation. Subsequently, it was banned.
lastly, can you please print me out a copy of the Concord agreement to back up what youre saying :p :
It was banned as it contravened the rule that states that the only steering input must be from steering wheel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Thanks for showing me you have double standards.
A totally erroneous and false argument to use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Taking drugs in athletics is illegal even if the drugs in question cannot be tested. The rules in Athletics specify that performance enhancing drugs of any description are illegal.
There is no relative law to Formula One design.
Finding a design loophole in Formula One is not illegal. It is simply being smart and having a design which interprets the rules in such a way as to conform to the letters of the law.
Ferrari were not charged with any offence, may I remind you.
There is a significant difference between the two that only somebody trying to spin an argument would ignore.
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.