Singapore 2008: Briatore and Symmonds resign

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

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.

---

You know what I don't like?
That instead of discussing the matter at hand you all find it more interesting to judge me as if I was the subject of the thread.
Can't you guys stick at discussing Singapore 2008 instead of this mud play? It's really tiring that I can't have a discussion without you trying to prove something about me. :\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

You know what I don't like?
That instead of discussing the matter at hand you all find it more interesting to judge me as if I was the subject of the thread.
Can't you guys stick at discussing Singapore 2008 instead of this mud play? It's really tiring that I can't have a discussion without you trying to prove something about me. :\

---

so how about you reply to my post then, assuming you can read it, regarding the dangers of accident debris and a stricken car on a live race track.

i have watched the crash back on youtube, he hits both walls and more than one wheel could easily have been left on the racing line in an acceleration zone, never mind the carbon fibre shards for punctures and other pieces of debirs. whilst Nelson might have been able to prefect a minor accident without hurting himself, the risk of F1 car vs concrete wall is stiull there, never mind the other 19 cars racing at ful speed. it also loked like an unsighted corner so it would give drivers very little time to react to a bouncing wheel or something else in their path. to purposefully create this situation is at least negligent and at worst criminal - both for Piqeut for being part of and going through with teh plan, and Renault for creating and ordering it. of course assuming that they can prove anything, which i doubt.

but to say it wasn't dangerous to stage an accident in the middle of a live race, leaving debris and a car on track is pushing it a little IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

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.

---

There was somebody on another (now closed) thread banging on about how no amount of risk was acceptable and how F1 should consider enclosed cockpits and all manner of upgrades to eliminate all potential harm.

That doesn't fit with your view that deliberately crashing at 100mph would be ok.

Thank goodness it wasn't you making the argument for reducing risk.

Oh... hang on.... :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Secondly IF he was asked to crash the car than he was doing it consciously and was in control of what he was doing.

---

Presumably you also think he was in control of any flying debris, and could accurately predict the actions of the other drivers arriving on the crash scene? Blimey, he's better than any of us gave him credit for. :rolleyes:

Good lord. Hypocrisy thy name is ioan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

You know what I don't like?
That instead of discussing the matter at hand you all find it more interesting to judge me as if I was the subject of the thread.
Can't you guys stick at discussing Singapore 2008 instead of this mud play? It's really tiring that I can't have a discussion without you trying to prove something about me. :\

---

ioan the problem is whenever folks want to discuss the matter, you take it as a threat to you intelligence or something and more often than not lash out with insults or belittling comments. That makes it hard to keep the discussion on course. At some point you've got to as yourself if maybe, just maybe , the tone of your comments might be a contributing factor in prevailing notions about you on this forum and in discussions. Believe me you don't get to 17,000+ post without having something valuable to contribute but as long as I've been on here, it seems that your good points are often lost by the manner of your response, lack of it or unwillingness to accept a valid alternative to a point you made. It is up to you to parse your words more carefully and treat other members more carefully no matter how outlandish you think their comments are. Nothing wrong with the odd snark remark here and there, or to call out individual posts for what they are, but when you make it a habit of doing so then it becomes bothersome.

Anyway, lets get back to the discussion, before pino shuts this thread down :)

Just to draw a line under this. I have to say that personally I quite enjoy talking with Ioan, we don't agree on everything (who does) but I have always respected his passion and knowledge of the sport.

Anyway I guess he won't see this (is that how ignore works? Never used it myself) so I guess we can just carry on with our wild speculation about Piquet jnr. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

Just to draw a line under this. I have to say that personally I quite enjoy talking with Ioan, we don't agree on everything (who does) but I have always respected his passion and knowledge of the sport.

Anyway I guess he won't see this (is that how ignore works? Never used it myself) so I guess we can just carry on with our wild speculation about Piquet jnr. ;)

---

It is easy to get carried away when writing on a forum. I have conversed with Ioan via email on occasion for whatever reason and he is a very affable gentleman.

My father, I can assure you, has been banned from more political forums than you can shake a stick at, and he (yes, I am biased) is a very nice chap!!! ;) .....

So, you see, you do not necessarily see the real people on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Presumably you also think he was in control of any flying debris, and could accurately predict the actions of the other drivers arriving on the crash scene? Blimey, he's better than any of us gave him credit for. :rolleyes:

Good lord. Hypocrisy thy name is ioan.

---

Let's make a thing clear, I was answering a post that stated that Piquet's life was in danger. I think it wasn't. You and some others are taking things out of context and twisting it around in order to start your personal wars instead of discussing the topic of the thread. I'm not going to take part in these kindergarten wars. See you in a serious discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

ioan the problem is whenever folks want to discuss the matter, you take it as a threat to you intelligence or something and more often than not lash out with insults or belittling comments.

---

Where did I insult anyone in these last exchanges?!
As I see it the problem is that you and some others are talking about me instead of sticking to the the thread's subject. :\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Ioan, nobody has been found guilty yet.

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.

---

And am I the only one who believes a Piquet is capable of lying? Deceit and self-promotion may well be hereditary - they get taken with the morning corn flakes if not in the DNA. Yes, this would also rebound to Nelsinho, but getting even with Flavio and Renault may outweight the risk. Besides, he may have cut a deal to minimize his penalty in exchange for "telling his story" about Renault.

If Nelsinho is the only source, I don't consider this allegation remotely credible. If Renault is penalized based solely on his testimony, the hearing is just a show trial.

ClarkFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

i have watched the crash back on youtube, he hits both walls and more than one wheel could easily have been left on the racing line in an acceleration zone, never mind the carbon fibre shards for punctures and other pieces of debirs. whilst Nelson might have been able to prefect a minor accident without hurting himself, the risk of F1 car vs concrete wall is stiull there, never mind the other 19 cars racing at ful speed. it also loked like an unsighted corner so it would give drivers very little time to react to a bouncing wheel or something else in their path. to purposefully create this situation is at least negligent and at worst criminal - both for Piqeut for being part of and going through with teh plan, and Renault for creating and ordering it. of course assuming that they can prove anything, which i doubt.

---

And with all that chaos, how could it have been possible to ensure that Alonso didn't hit some of the debris and bung up his race, then and there? End of fiendishly crafted strategy to fix the race and keep Renault in F1, on the ordinary developments of a race. All of which makes it seem highly unlikely to me that any of this story is remotely credible.

ClarkFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Ioan, nobody has been found guilty yet.

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.

---

Totally agree.

I have stated previously that I find this allergation fantastic and hope it has no foundation. However, for such a serious allergation, it is right and proper that it is investigated in full to the sake of F1 and Renault.

If they are guilty then the culprits need to face severe penalties including exclusion from the sport but if they are innocent then they should have no stain or blemish of this allergation attributed to them and if a malicious, spurious rumour has been started, the originator thrown out of the sport for good.

However, referring to the McLaren plans you asked for proof of, there is of course none to say that it was incorporated into the Renault because it wasn't investigated. We know the thief stole plans and worked at Renault on a completely different discipline to what his competency was which happened to coincide with the design of the plans he stole. We also know that the data was availiable to Renault for many months but apparently not used..... or that's what they "told" Charlie.

In fact, we don't have a clue because they were able to sweep up after them and when Charlie "investigated", he took their word at face value and it was all wrapped up in a few hours.

As I said, you want the data then you recover the backup tapes as they are time and dated so cannot be fiddled with but that wasn't desireable. I wonder if they are now that Max has fallen out of bed with Flav ;)

This is why I have not added me thoughts to this - we have no proof as to who made this claim and what evidence they have. Until that happens this is a non-story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

I have stated previously that I find this allergation fantastic and hope it has no foundation. However, for such a serious allergation, it is right and proper that it is investigated in full to the sake of F1 and Renault.

---

I agree with that, but.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

However, referring to the McLaren plans you asked for proof of, there is of course none to say that it was incorporated into the Renault because it wasn't investigated.

---

Thank you for confirming that you have nothing to back up your accusations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Thank you for confirming that you have nothing to back up your accusations.

---

Because it wasn't investigated.

I'm not going to argue about this because it's a crazy situation that was purely political but hopefully it will be investigated yet. If so, I expect you will get all the confirmation you don't want :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

If so, I expect you will get all the confirmation you don't want :D

---

Once again, thank you for proving you have no proof to your accusations.

That makes them bollocks, cock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'm lost, whats the accusation knock-on has made??

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

When I saw that this was being opened out past the Crashgate issue, McLaren data was the first thing that jumped into my mind.

Let's not forget that had the FIA done any more than a cursory "were you being naughty?" investigation then Renault would have been deeper in the than McLaren. There was considerable evidence that data was incorporated into the car and had they asked to see the Backup tapes rather than live systems, then Renault would have been fooked.

Perhaps Flav should have remembered Max turning a blind eye before doing an et tu Brutus.

Making the mistake that Max is down and out is not a clever move!!

---

For the record

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'm lost, whats the accusation knock-on has made??

---

The "no smoke without fire" allegations that Renault received data from McLaren, but provided investigators with a snapshot of their storage system rather than backup tapes from the time the offence was alleged to have taken place.

T'was a similar allegation to "Spygate", only McLaren got penalised millions while Renault didn't even get properly investigated.

Quote:

---

Renault have escaped punishment in the latest spy scandal to hit Formula One.

The International Automobile Federation (FIA) found Renault guilty of breaching F1 regulations by having rival team McLaren data in their possession.

But the sport's governing body, who will publish their detailed decision on Friday, opted to impose no penalty on former world champions Renault.

---

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/7129049.stm

FIA consistency at its very best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Still lost I'm afraid, Knock-on just repeated what happened back in 2007, nothing new... :)

---

No, he repeated an accusation, one that was never proved, which certainly is not "what happened".

For it to be "what happened" you would need proof, and he ain't got any.

All he has is assumptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Have you got any proof to say it didn't happen? :D

---

About 40% proof no doubt, wrapped in brown paper.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

No, he repeated an accusation, one that was never proved, which certainly is not "what happened".

For it to be "what happened" you would need proof, and he ain't got any.

All he has is assumptions.

---

They were found guilty by the FIA of possessing McLaren data: see the BBC link I posted above.

However, unlike in the McLaren/Ferrari "spygate" case, the FIA chose in their infinte wisdom not to take any action.

Why, we can only speculate. Coughmaxhatesroncough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

They were found guilty by the FIA of possessing McLaren data: see the BBC link I posted above.

However, unlike in the McLaren/Ferrari "spygate" case, the FIA chose in their infinte wisdom not to take any action.

Why, we can only speculate. Coughmaxhatesroncough.

---

Nasty cough there Dave. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Once again, thank you for proving you have no proof to your accusations.

That makes them bollocks, cock.

---

I really am getting fed up with your childish insults. For a grown man to behave like this is pretty pathetic, wouldn't you agree? Hopefully we can avoid this behaviour in the future and get back to the topic of the thread.

As Dave pointed out, Renault were found guilty of having the data but we have to accept that because they insisted it was never used, then it wasn't. There was no investigation, no analysis and no real attempt to find the truth apart from Charlie spending 1/2 a day interviewing the protagonists to ask if they were naughty.

Some people may prefer to have their head up their ass about this but it was the most blatent whitewash in F1 history in my opinion. However, that doesn't change the fact that they were found guilty. It is a proven accusation and not some figment of my imagination as you would have the forum believe.

The point I was trying to make was that as the FIA went back and re-examined McLaren, Flav should be careful that they don't do the same.

Ed Gorman's view:

Quote:

---

I have to admit that, even after all the scandals and intrigue of the last few years and having read about dirty tricks in the years before I started writing about Formula One, I am finding it hard to believe that the allegations against Renault at Singapore last year could possibly be true.
All one can say is that, if it turns out that they are correct and Nelson Piquet was asked to crash his car deliberately, then this will go down as one of the worst episodes of cheating in sporting history, across all sports. Right now, all we know about are allegations, however, and we must regard Renault as entirely innocent until proven otherwise....

---

I'm a bit lost as to how can be seen having 11 disks of 'similar nature' (whatever that means) be on a 'grander scale' as having the whole technical dossier about the F2007.
Is there anything that is better and completer than having all the info about a car?!

Note that I believe that Renault should have been punished to even if they chose to collaborate with the FIA instead of trying to dismiss the charges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

The Renault scandal in 2007 was quoted at the time to be on a grander scale to the Mclaren controversy.
http://www.asiaone.com/Motoring/News...129-38881.html
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=33444
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/12/0...n-spying-case/
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63853
Whereas chief designer Mike Coughlan had in his possession a dossier containing drawings of key Ferrari components, Renault had aquired 11 disks of a similar nature. Seven key members of the Renault design team had admitted to accessing the information on 15 different computers, but promised they had not used the information in any context.
Mclaren also pledged that they had discarded any of Coughlans designs which may have been influenced by their stolen data. Scrutineers were happy that Mclaren had not used any of the data and were under close watch for the remainder of the 2007 season, testing, and the 2008 season opener.

Renault were questioned over 3 days and scrutineer's were not used in their case. I think it goes to show that last time they were let off extremely lightly probably due to pressure from the FIA with the controversy surrounding the sport at the time.

Race fixing could see Renault as a car manufacturer pull out at the end of the year IMO... :)

---

The way the FIA works, if they can't get them for race fixing, I wouldn't be surprised to see them getting them for this. It wouldn't take much digging.

Personally, I think a line should just de drawn over Renaultgate and let it go away. It serves no purpose now and just because McLaren got hammered doesn't mean I want to see Renault similarly punished. What McLaren did was wrong and although the practice was commonplace in the sport, and although the punnishment was draconian and Max's way of getting to Ron, still they deserved to be found guilty.

If Renault are found guilty I hope the punishment isn't too harsh. Ultimately, all they did was cleverly use the then-ludicrous SC rules to their advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans

If Renault are found guilty I hope the punishment isn't too harsh. Ultimately, all they did was cleverly use the then-ludicrous SC rules to their advantage.

---

I really cannot agree with you on this one 3b.

If, ( and we keep having to write IF ) Renault are guilty of deliberately crashing a driver then I hope they throw the bloody book at them. Personally, I think Schumacher was very lucky not to get a ban when he did it but IMHO, this was much worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Out of interest ioan do you know exactly what the content of those 11 disks were? Mclaren had a 780 page document regarding the F2007 which may have been 5 or 6 meg in size. For data to be stored on 11 disks, suggests to me and the artcle writer that this may account to a similar nature. Unless of course these 11 disks were the content of Ron Dennis's online poker strategies? You guess is as good as mine.

---

First of all you don't know much about any of the data and thus, as I pointed it out, saying that in one case there was more data than in the other is a bit far fetched IMO.

Also saying that the 780 pages of documentation about the F2007 would fit in 5-6 Mbytes is a very wild guess.

If you go back and read the articles about the two case, written back in 2007, you'll find it was discussed in the press what those disks at Renault contained and it wasn't about the whole car, just certain systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

If you go back and read the articles about the two case, written back in 2007, you'll find...

---

...that they have no relevance to Renault being charged with conspiring "with its driver, Nelson Piquet Jr, to cause a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix with the aim of causing the deployment of the safety car to the advantage of its other driver, Fernando Alonso."

:s mokin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

First of all you don't know much about any of the data and thus, as I pointed it out, saying that in one case there was more data than in the other is a bit far fetched IMO.

Also saying that the 780 pages of documentation about the F2007 would fit in 5-6 Mbytes is a very wild guess.

---

I don't know whether it's worth pointing out that 780 pages would easily fit on 5-6 Meg but it will easily. If you take about 10k for a sheet of PDF for example, you can easily store it on a single floppy so 5-6 mb is plenty. However, that's by the by.

Quote:

---

If you go back and read the articles about the two case, written back in 2007, you'll find it was discussed in the press what those disks at Renault contained and it wasn't about the whole car, just certain systems.

---

It is said by Renault what was on the disk and what was returned to McLaren. From memory it was suspension, fuel and something else. It was also said by Renault that a couple of people may have glanced at a couple of low res diagrams but not acted on it. Bit like the old "I didn't inhale" one that :laugh:

IF nobody used any of the data, why then did Macreth immediatly start work on a fuel project when he moved from McLaren even though he had no experience whatsoever on Fuel systems???

Then we have to remember how this came to light. It was from a relitivly junior engineer that joined McLaren from Renault who mentioned that they had all seen the McLaren data for the last year or so.

Renault have been caught in the cookie jar and been exposed as liars on just these 2 points so I suggest instead of raising the ugly matter, you do what everyone else is trying to do and let sleeping dogs lay. I can see no good whatsoever in dragging Renault through the mud as has happened to McLaren but don't try and gloss over it as if it was nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

I don't know whether it's worth pointing out that 780 pages would easily fit on 5-6 Meg but it will easily. If you take about 10k for a sheet of PDF for example, you can easily store it on a single floppy so 5-6 mb is plenty. However, that's by the by.

---

It's just that we aren't talking about text in PDF format here but about more complex data that most probably needs more storage than a couple kb per page, which page would probably not be A4 either.

Anyways as you point it out yourself the data that Renault had about the McLaren was only about a few systems, which contradicts Henners' claims that it was more than what McLaren had about the F2007, which was pretty much everything about the car down to the smallest detail.

And BTW I agree that Renault engineers certainly took advantage of the data in the very same way the McLaren ones' did with the Ferrari data, ie started integrating the solutions to their cars ASAP. I'm also fairly sure that McLaren getting away with a fine and Renault getting away with a slap on the wrist had all to do with a certain Ecclestone protecting his pockets.

However, did the FIA say anything about revisiting Renault if they smell something fishy related to them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

It's just that we aren't talking about text in PDF format here but about more complex data that most probably needs more storage than a couple kb per page, which page would probably not be A4 either.

Anyways as you point it out yourself the data that Renault had about the McLaren was only about a few systems, which contradicts Henners' claims that it was more than what McLaren had about the F2007, which was pretty much everything about the car down to the smallest detail.

And BTW I agree that Renault engineers certainly took advantage of the data in the very same way the McLaren ones' did with the Ferrari data, ie started integrating the solutions to their cars ASAP. I'm also fairly sure that McLaren getting away with a fine and Renault getting away with a slap on the wrist had all to do with a certain Ecclestone protecting his pockets.

However, did the FIA say anything about revisiting Renault if they smell something fishy related to them?

---

I'm sorry ioan but you misread what I wrote. I didn't say that they had a few systems. I said Renault only admitted to having access to 4 systems and were proven to be liars in the rest of the statement so I have no reason to believe them on that point.

So, I don't contradict Henners claim at all and because they were never properly investigated by the FIA, cannot provide the evidence that should be availiable to confirm or deny what they had access to.

I do agree that Renault began incorporating the data into the car ASAP as proven by PM's work on the fuel project but as far as the McLaren goes, the FIA pulled the car apart and went through it with a fine tooth comb looking for evidence of Ferrari IP and found none.

Lastly, I don't think there is any suggestion that the FIA are going to reinvestigate (or investigate in the first place) this debarcle but merely suggested that the way Max's FIA works, if they can't nail Renault for CrashGate, they may well reopen WhitewashGate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans

If Renault are found guilty I hope the punishment isn't too harsh. Ultimately, all they did was cleverly use the then-ludicrous SC rules to their advantage.

---

I disagree totally. They didn't just take advantage of the (admittedly daft) safety car rule, they are alleged to have deliberately engineered the situation which resulted in the appearance of the SC in the first place.

If this wasn't bad enough, it's alleged that they did so by deliberately instructing their driver to crash; and no matter how safe ioan thinks that may have been it would have posed a totally avoidable risk to following cars, track workers, and Piquet himself.

If (big "if") there's truth behind this then I can't think of a punishment serious enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

I disagree totally. They didn't just take advantage of the (admittedly daft) safety car rule, they are alleged to have deliberately engineered the situation which resulted in the appearance of the SC in the first place.

If this wasn't bad enough, it's alleged that they did so by deliberately instructing their driver to crash; and no matter how safe ioan thinks that may have been it would have posed a totally avoidable risk to following cars, track workers, and Piquet himself.

If (big "if") there's truth behind this then I can't think of a punishment serious enough.

---

:up:

What if a wheel flew off to kill a Marshall or a suspension part sprang back injuring another driver.

In looking at this (potential) incident, you have to consider the very real risks that could have resulted.

If I do 35mph in a 30mph zone, I get 3 points and a £60 fine. If I do the same after consuming 3 pints of "old Rumble Guts" then the punishment is likely to be 18 month ban and £1000 fine because of the seriousness of my actions.

If there is a case to answer and they someone is guilty, I wouldn't want to see them back in Motorsport if I was a competitor.

If this had occurred forty or fifty years ago we'd be treating it as a humorous tale of derring-do.

Everyone's hysterical nowadays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans

If this had occurred forty or fifty years ago we'd be treating it as a humorous tale of derring-do.

Everyone's hysterical nowadays.

---

This would never have been treated as a tale of Derring-do 3b.

In all forms of Motorsport, you have to trust your life to other people and drivers. It's a hard sport with no quarter asked or given but you have to rely on your rivals not to kill you.

I really cannot see how anyone could possibly condone this act (if it's proven) as anything but the most diabolical act of cheating in Motorsport. It is akin to the Bloodgate incident at Harliquinns or Ben Johnson in Sprinting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

This would never have been treated as a tale of Derring-do 3b.

---

Wouldnt it? People still talk with nostalgic affection about 'Black' Jack Brabham putting a wheel off-course in order to flick stones at the chasing pack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

In all forms of Motorsport, you have to trust your life to other people and drivers. It's a hard sport with no quarter asked or given but you have to rely on your rivals not to kill you.

I really cannot see how anyone could possibly condone this act (if it's proven) as anything but the most diabolical act of cheating in Motorsport. It is akin to the Bloodgate incident at Harliquinns or Ben Johnson in Sprinting.

---

Presumably you would have supported life bans for Senna and Schumacher from '90 and '94 respectively?

And I'm not condoning what Renault are alledged to have done. If it turns out to be true then they deserve to be sanctioned, but not to anything like the degree being suggested elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans

Wouldnt it? People still talk with nostalgic affection about 'Black' Jack Brabham putting a wheel off-course in order to flick stones at the chasing pack.



Presumably you would have supported life bans for Senna and Schumacher from '90 and '94 respectively?

And I'm not condoning what Renault are alledged to have done. If it turns out to be true then they deserve to be sanctioned, but not to anything like the degree being suggested elsewhere.

---

What Senna and Schumacher did was disgracefull and should have resulted in sanctions. Senna may have thought he had justification but there is no justification for deliberately ramming off an opponant. Schumacher made a split second decision and I doubt it was pre-meditated but he still cheated a championship.

Both should have been punished but the thing here is if true, a driver was ordered as a strategy to crash. There can be no justification and yes, if true, I wouldn't want to see Piquet or Flav at another racing track. Ever.

Renault were not found guilty of using Mclaren data.

They were found guilty of having the data. Just as Mclaren were at the first WMSC.

Mclaren, however, decided to play silly-buggers with the FIA, leading to them being back in front of the WMSC.

Renault did not fail to cooperate.

If you cannot understand the difference, then perhaps you need to attend night school, since you certainly missed out on parts of your education.