Singapore 2008: Briatore and Symmonds resign

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leopardsleeping

I'd rather have opinion that team order is internal affair of teams.

---

Except that it would be a clear breach of therules. "39.1: Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited". That's black and white.

Quote:

---

The occurrence has been good a while, hence this case is already beyond its limitation period.

---

Where is this specified? Even civil cases have (in the UK) a six-year limitation period. Singapore was barely one year ago. Just because some time has passed doesn't mean that it should all be forgotten if new evidence comes to light.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

None of this should be "swept under the carpet". F1 as a sport needs to demonstrate to the wider world that it's capable of dealing with any allegation in a fair and transparent way. There's enough accusations flying around already damaging the sport, the last thing we need is a whitewash or some dodgy deal made with a secret handshake.

If there's race-fixing or corruption in the sport it should be exposed and flushed out. If that means the exit of an otherwise successful team then so be it.

---

Completely agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Comments from the drivers in Thursday's press conference:


http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78465

---

There were 3 wise answers and 2 not so bright ones.

Quote:

---

AUTOSPORT understands that part of the evidence that has been submitted to the FIA ahead of the hearing is a letter that Briatore sent to Piquet Sr. on July 28 - two days after Max Mosley had been informed of the Singapore events but two days prior to Piquet Jr. making his official testimony to the governing body.
In the letter, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Briatore rigorously denies any suggestion that Piquet was asked to crash on purpose – and suggests that the matter has been brought to light purely to ‘blackmail' him into renewing the Brazilian's driver's contract.

---

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78467

Both sides seem intent on using the media to air their dirty laundry, instead of waiting until the 21st for the proper hearing. :s

I'm sick of all the crap happening in F1 :down:

Time to find another formula to watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

There were 3 wise answers and 2 not so bright ones.

---

I think 2 were wise and 3 not so bright. "and hopefully it will never happen again"... what? what happened? we haven't seen any proof yet. Right? It's interesting how angry some people get around here without any proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Both sides seem intent on using the media to air their dirty laundry, instead of waiting until the 21st for the proper hearing. :s

---

This is the way things are done in this highly mediated (or is that mediatised ?) age.
Each side tries to put the public pressure on the other side no matter if they are guilty or not. Common sense long went down the drain. :\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eu

I think 2 were wise and 3 not so bright. "and hopefully it will never happen again"... what? what happened? we haven't seen any proof yet. Right? It's interesting how angry some people get around here without any proof.

---

IMO those who restrained from comments (given that is not their job to judge this and also they probably don't know too much about anyway) did it the right way.

Rubens just contradicted himslef in big style, First he moans about how he was pressured by Todt into something he didn't want to do than he goes and takes Flavio's part. :s

Liuzzi just goes in circles stating that it's difficult to believe. :crazy:

This snippet from an article from todays 'Times Online';

Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula One commercial rights-holder, told The Times that Piquet informed him he was going to tell the FIA about the affair as long ago as the Monaco Grand Prix at the end of May.

According to Ecclestone, Piquet has told the FIA that it was Ecclestone who encouraged the driver to follow through on a course of action that would damage Briatore, but the promoter denied this.

“At no time did I tell him to f*** Flavio,” Ecclestone said last night. “He said he was going to do it and I simply said, ‘There is no use you saying you are going to do something — either do it or stop talking about it.’ To be honest, I genuinely believed at that time that he would not do it.”

So, let me get this right, Bernie new about this earlier this year, and said nothing.

WHAT IS GOING ON???

:down:

I have my doubts that Alonso knows nothing about this plan.

If he knew nothing how did they explain the light fuel strategy to him?

Well, a teammate crashing to help another one is not new. Lorenzo Bandini did just that by crashing into Graham Hill in the last race of the season which allowed Surtees to win the 1964 championship.

I don't think Renault will be thrown out, or even received sanctions. Perhaps a huge fine like what happened to McLaren. But Briatore and Symmonds may receive a life ban. Certainly Mosley will make sure this happens to Briatore. Piquet Jr. probably have his basic racing license suspended, thus cannot participate in any form of motor racing. I am sure that he will have a racing future. This is because his father probably can buy or form a racing team at any level which he can afford. I am sure there are some sponsors that will take pity on Piquet junior, thinking that he was also a victim.

I doubt Piquet Jr. was the one who suggested the crash. He was a rookie and it was doubtful he had enough experience or understanding of strategy to even come up with the plan. Racing drivers do not help out teammates unless they were told to by their bosses, and even that they may disobey team orders. Besides, if it were him who suggested this strategy, why would Briatore and Symmonds agree to it?

I think Alonso was in the know, but not the entire plot. Alonso and his engineer must felt odd about his own strategy of light fuel load. Symmonds probably assured them that it would be fine. Alonso probably decided to "don't ask don't tell".

Renault probably will withdraw. No board of directors would tolerate this. Whether they will just supply engines I really cannot make a guess.

The irony is that, it was totally unnecessary because Alonso won the next race legitimately without any luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ST205GT4

I have my doubts that Alonso knows nothing about this plan.

If he knew nothing how did they explain the light fuel strategy to him?

---

Doesn't stack up, does it?

Talk about digging a hole, and making it bigger......

I like to think that the Piquets have instigated this, as we all know the underhand tactics Snr used at Williams, and because I look on Pat Simmonds as a genuine chap.

However, Was Flavio in charge of Benneton when the filters were removed from the fuel hoses.

Easy to point fingers, and it's a real mess to pick through....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

So, let me get this right, Bernie new about this earlier this year, and said nothing.

WHAT IS GOING ON???

:down:

---

Bernie probably figured out that if it were true, Renault might get kicked out or withdraw. It is to his advantage that the whole incident was not reported. He cannot afford to lose any more teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alcatrazhack

Bernie probably figure out that if it were true, Renault might get kicked out or withdraw. It is to his advantage that the whole incident was not reported. He cannot afford to lose any more teams.

---

At the expense of transparency? Given he is pals and business partners with Flavio, to keep schtum is probably not the best solution!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

At the expense of transparency? Given he is pals and business partners with Flavio, to keep schtum is probably not the best solution!

---

I guess Flavio will concentrate on soccer from now on.

Quote:

---

Renault say they are launching legal action against Nelson Piquet Jr and his father Nelson Piquet over race-fixing allegations made against the team.

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8250436.stm

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78478

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

From the Autosport article:

Quote:

---

However, today the ING Renault F1 Team and its Managing Director Flavio Briatore personally, wish to state that they have commenced criminal proceedings against Nelson Piquet Junior and Nelson Piquet Senior in France

---

Have they though? Certainly in the UK no private individual or company can begin criminal proceedings. Only the CPS (or in extreme cases organisations like the Information Commissioner) can do that. Is this Flavspeak for "we've told the police but want to make it sound more scary"?

I also wonder how the WMSC hearing might affect any legal proceedings.

If Renault are found guilty by the FIA that would rather undermine their case against the Piquets wouldn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

I also wonder how the WMSC hearing might affect any legal proceedings.

If Renault are found guilty by the FIA that would rather undermine their case against the Piquets wouldn't it?

---

Well, let's just hope that the Piquets are in the wrong then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Is this Flavspeak for "we've told the police but want to make it sound more scary"?

---

Most likely.

Ps is flavspeak similar to rontalk? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

Most likely.

Ps is flavspeak similar to rontalk? ;)

---

Other way round

Flavtalk = Ronspeak but not equal to Abespeak!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

This snippet from an article from todays 'Times Online';

Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula One commercial rights-holder, told The Times that Piquet informed him he was going to tell the FIA about the affair as long ago as the Monaco Grand Prix at the end of May.

According to Ecclestone, Piquet has told the FIA that it was Ecclestone who encouraged the driver to follow through on a course of action that would damage Briatore, but the promoter denied this.

“At no time did I tell him to f*** Flavio,” Ecclestone said last night. “He said he was going to do it and I simply said, ‘There is no use you saying you are going to do something — either do it or stop talking about it.’ To be honest, I genuinely believed at that time that he would not do it.”

So, let me get this right, Bernie new about this earlier this year, and said nothing.

WHAT IS GOING ON???

:down:

---

So typical of Bernard Ecclestone. He is just not up to the game when complicated situations arise so he directs everything to be solved by Max who luckily enough (for Bernie) is no slouch when it comes to finding the right solutions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

So typical of Bernard Ecclestone. He is just not up to the game when complicated situations arise so he directs everything to be solved by Max who luckily enough (for Bernie) is no slouch when it comes to finding the right solutions.

---

Alernatively, if he 'knew' that the Piquets were at fault, he was baiting them perhaps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

From the Autosport article:


Have they though? Certainly in the UK no private individual or company can begin criminal proceedings. Only the CPS (or in extreme cases organisations like the Information Commissioner) can do that. Is this Flavspeak for "we've told the police but want to make it sound more scary"?

---

AFAIK this can't be done in France either.
And why am I not surprised that they are doing it in France instead of a neutral country like the Switzerland for example. Same old French protectionism that never changes.

This is just a try to intimidate the Piquets to back off, but IMO it's too late now that Rufus got hold of the sworn statements and other relevant data.

Anyway if the FIA finds Symonds and/or Briatore guilty than Renault will look like clueless muppets and will have to endure a nice little legal action from he Piquet's that might end with them getting enough money to buy a smaller F1 team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Alernatively, if he 'knew' that the Piquets were at fault, he was baiting them perhaps?

---

What for? There's nothing in it for him. And he would have known that Max is able to tell a lie from truth especially when he had a full squad of private detectives to investigate it before making anything public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Well, let's just hope that the Piquets are in the wrong then.

---

Nah, I'm really geared up to see the sweat bag leave F1 once and for all! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

So typical of Bernard Ecclestone. He is just not up to the game when complicated situations arise...

---

Eh :confused:

It's not for Bernie to rule on these kind of things. That's the FIA's job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leopardsleeping

The occurrence has been good a while, hence this case is already beyond its limitation period.

---

The police and FA are considering investigating an allegation of match fixing which dates back to... wait for it...

1995.

If it's a crime, it's still a crime a decade or more later.

Quote:

---

Police have contacted the Football Association over an admission by former England striker Matt Le Tissier that he was part of a failed betting scam.

In his autobiography, Taking Le Tiss, he admitted gambling on the time of the first throw-in in Southampton's 2-0 win at Wimbledon in April 1995.

---

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/8250042.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Anyway if the FIA finds Symonds and/or Briatore guilty than Renault will look like clueless muppets and will have to endure a nice little legal action from he Piquet's that might end with them getting enough money to buy a smaller F1 team.

---

Oooh, conspiracy theory overdrive time: Renault pull out leaving the future of the race time in doubt; the Piquets swoop and buy up all the assets for a fraction of their value and Nelson gets his drive back! :D :p :

Interview with Max:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78483

Quote:

---

Mosley said the FIA had no choice but to launch a proper investigation into the matter after Piquet had informed the governing body of the events, and he made it clear on Friday about how grave he deemed race-fixing to be.

"If you look at any other sport, if somebody fixes the result then it's usually taken seriously," said Mosley, speaking to selected media including AUTOSPORT in his office at the Monza circuit. "Fixing is one degree worse than cheating.

"If you're a cyclist and you take dope, that's cheating. If you bribe the other cyclists, or you get somebody to have a crash in the peloton so the yellow jersey guy crashes, that's more serious.

"Then if it puts human life at risk, whether it's the spectators, the marshals or the drivers, then it's more serious again. The moment we talk about that, we sort of imply they (Renault) are guilty, but we don't know. Until they put their defence in, we've got to assume they're innocent."

Mosley has confirmed that Piquet himself has been promised immunity from being punished over the matter, as part of the deal for him providing evidence.

"We have said to him that, and I don't know exactly how it was phrased, but he has been told that if he tells us the truth then he will not be proceeded against individually," he said. "It is exactly the same as it was for Alonso [in the McLaren case in 2007]."

---

So Piquet gets away with no punishment, whatever the outcome, and if guilty Renault will probably be excluded from the championship. Also, the Singapore GP result last year can't be amended so Alonso keeps the win regardless!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

the way I look at it, he caused the accident all by himself and after sitting down with his father and confidant and seeing how it it inadvertently aided Alonso, he decided to leverage that to his advantage and probably sorta held the team hostage with that bit of evidence as some sort of a guarantee to continue racing with the team. the only real surprise was that he continued to race for them in 2009 when everyone was sure he would not be retained.

This leads me to believe that he held that incident over them and tried to use it to continue racing with the team. it would also explain the team's complete disdain for him and Flavio's apparent disinterest in him completely. completely fed up with the antics, and poor driving they finally fired him in Hungary and are probably well prepared to defend this stupid accusation.

The real loser here is Piquet in my book. Followed by the MM lead FIa who is trying to get one more scalp on his way out as petty revenge.

---

lol quoting myself, but I think i was on to s/thing with renault's released statement. http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/9/9903.html

seems like papa and son were trying to blackmail the team to continue his ride by insinuating that the crash was deliberate and it would spell big trouble for renault. NOW if this is true then that's really low. and NPJr and father deserve to be ostracized completely.

so we now have 2 different versions of events and I tend to believe the latter

Can I just get this right.

Flav says it was never discussed.
Pat says it was discussed but it was Jnr's idea.
Jn'r says he was invited to a meeting where the strategy was put to him.

Are these the facts of the matter?

If so, it's a given that the meeting happened and that the subject of a deliberate crash was discussed.

If that's the case, then Flav is liar #1.

Who is telling the truth between Pat and Jn'r?

Well, if you believe that Jn'r can come up with this idea all on his own to benefit his team mate, Renault and their sponsors who also sponsored the GP, then I've got a great investment opportunity in Peckham Spring Water for you.

Is it more likely that a strategy was thought up between 2 great F1 minds and suggested to a underperforming driver who would have sdone anything to secure a drive for next year?

It looks like we have gone from IF there was any substance to this allergation to "who is telling the truth".

Sad to say but apart from revenge against Flav, I cannot see any reason that Jn'r would lie especially as he still had a contract when he told Bernie about the allergation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

seems like papa and son were trying to blackmail the team to continue his ride by insinuating that the crash was deliberate and it would spell big trouble for renault. NOW if this is true then that's really low. and NPJr and father deserve to be ostracized completely.

---

But that will not happen, because Max has given them (Jnr, certainly) immunity. Perhaps they should grant Renault immunity if they tell the truth.

Now, how do you tell the truth from a lie?

Madness, it really is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Peckham Spring Water .

---

Cushty.

Nelson you plonker! :p

<Snr to Jnr>

Trust me Rodders, this time next year you'll be WDC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

<Snr to Jnr>

Trust me Rodders, this time next year you'll be WDC.

---

Defense de fumer! He who dares wins.

Regardless of whether he was ordered to crash or not many teams will see Piquet Jr as damaged goods because of his performances and now this, so getting any sort of employment in F1 will be hard.