And, by your well argued logic, the very same could be said about Mclaren's rebuttal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Printable View
And, by your well argued logic, the very same could be said about Mclaren's rebuttal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
jean Todts words
http://motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=262648&FS=F1Quote:
Finally, Todt summarised Ferrari's ongoing legal action against former employee Nigel Stepney and McLaren's chief designer Mike Coughlan. "We have a penal case ongoing in Italy against Nigel Stepney and we have a civil case in UK against Mike Coughlan.
"There is one hearing organised by the FIA on the 26th. At this stage, as I said two weeks ago, we cannot comment on it. Unfortunately it has been leaked too much in the press over the last days but it's out of our control. The more people who are aware, the more opportunity you have to have leaks. We just have to follow the procedures which are in process." But Todt did explain that Ferrari would be represented. However, he didn't confirm whether they would be offering evidence against McLaren, but closed by saying that "we may comment after the hearing."
what I find interesting is that knowing what is contained in the statement, they are not choosing to persue McLaren with criminal charges relating to theft or espionage.
now, this is an opinion but my suggestion is that they know McLaren are clean otherwise they would have them up for it. Ron is stating catagorically that they are clean, putting his reputation on the line, and the FIA are going through a due dilligence excercise to ensure everything is transparent.
Whilst I tend to agree, it's worth bearing in mind thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
A) The FIA have charged Mclaren. Therefore it is not just due diligence. There is a charge to be answered.
The FIA deal with sporting regulations, and breaking a sporting regulation doesn't have to involve a criminal act.
B) Investigations by the Italian police are ongoing. Just because a party hasn't been charged yet doesn't mean that they are not going to be.
very much so. BUT, Ron has been very adamant and specific in such a way that he cannot be misinterpreted in any way. if there was any evidence, he would be crucified.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
if there was complicity at McLaren, Ron could never be so sure and confident that there was no smoking gun. This leads me to think they are clean. Ronny's just TOO adamant for any uncertentity to be there.
A) you are right but we dont know if this charge relates to this affadavit or something else. a little bird told me that it may relate to an email and not these plans. however, I stress that is rumour and I have no link.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
B) agree totally.
Many a man has cried "I'm innocent" when they aren't. Being adamant is no guarantee of honesty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Not to mention that, very much like Maranello in Enzo's days, perhaps nobody dare be honest with the boss?
what you mean is that if McLaren employees apart from Mike saw this document, and didn't report it, then McLaren should explain why not. there is no "apparently", but there is a rumour.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
now, a little scenario for you.
what if Ross Brawn was approached by Nigel who said
"Ross old man, hypothetically what if I was to tell you that someone sent me the plans to next years McLaren".
and Ross replied
"Hypothetically, I would say they are hotter than a super-heated potato and you should burn them straight away".
is Rossie Boy in the wrong and should he grass him up to Todt and the FIA?
remember those bodies before you answer because this may come back to haunt Ferrari.
Seeing a document, or being told of a documents existence is not the same as being asked a hypothetical question about a document.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
The first two will get you charged by the FIA, the third won't.
I dont think the first part is right. evens Rons enemys respect his integrity. Ive never seen anyone in the business call Ron a dishonest man. now, Flav you would check your watch was on your wrist after shaking his hand :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
the worrying thing is the second sentence. Ron had a crisis meeting the day before this broke and specifically asked if anyone else had seen any Ferrari documents. now, obviously I cant prove this so we will call it a rumour but apparently, it was news to the design and engineering heads. they know Ron was putting his reputation on the line, as he has before for McLaren, so if anyone witheld information, they may have sealed Rons fate. I really hope this isn't the case because this will all come out on Thursday.
Space travel has been always a fact since we are three dimensional bodies moving (traveling) in a three dimensional world (space).Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres
Outer space travel is a fact since Yuri Gagarin (or since Sputnik if you don't mind if isn't any human travelling).
Interstellar travel isn't a fact. And won't be a fact as far as light speed would be a limit for objects with mass.
I know it's off topic, but I couldn't resist.
I agree with you, but maybe they think that while justice will never consideer McLaren guilty, FIA would do easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat.tyres