FIA sends spy case to Court of Appeal

I've already said that I didn't believe Ferrari's floor was illegal (others here disagree), but the FIA clarification made it so, and all the teams were required to make changes. Therefore, had no clarification been sought, or given, would the floor have been illegal? RD's view is yes it would, and given the FIA's clarification it's hard to disagree. Ferrari's floor was designed to exploit a loophole/omission in the rules and without the clarification it is reasonable to assume it would continue to have been used.

RD doesn't say McLaren needed to be told about the about the rear wing separator by Stepney. He does say both that and the floor "could be and were seen on the Ferrari car prior to the Australian Grand Prix".-ArrowsFA1


"Given the FIA's clarification it's hard to disagree" ?

It is for that very reason that one must , as you have stated you do , agree with the FIA and Ferrari(and others) that it was not illegal in Melbourne .

And , of course it would be used if it was legal . As soon as it was clarified they dutifully removed the now offending parts .

If Ron is saying that they were seen prior to the Oz race , then he might have mentioned it then , instead of throwing doubt on Ferrari during the season .
This rather flies in the face of not wanting to bring the championship into disrepute during the season rhetoric with which he is coming up .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

So his detailed letter is not a response to the fact that Ferrari have refused to accept the FIA hearing verdict, despite being allowed to present their evidence and take part in the procedings, and have repeatedly made unproven allegations via the media without producing any new evidence to back them up?

Me-thinks you oversimplify things a little :) but Max has given Ferrari another opportunity. If they have the evidence then there shouldn't be a problem. If not...Well, let's wait and see.

---

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Really? A team that has been the subject of espionage, betrayal and having their designs in the hands of their main rivals designer have been distasteful?

Whereas Mclaren's has been above and beyond reproach, as has Coughlan and your set-up mate Stepney?

Go on, keep them coming, it's entertaining.

---

I don't think anyone here would deny that Ferrari have good reason to be upset that their data was found in the possession of a McLaren employee. But as far as I can tell from all of this, that is all that has actually been shown. Betrayal, probably - espionage, certainly not.

There has not been any evidence presented that supports the allegations that Ferrari have been making to the press that McLaren knew about the 780 pages of documents before suspending Coughlan or used any of that information to their advantage. I'm not aware that Ferrari have even presented material evidence that it was Stepney who sent the documents (and he is still denying it).

So to begin with, McLaren choose not to say anything to the press and wait until the FIA enquiry is over but as a result are assumed by many Ferrari fans to be guilty of all the allegations that Ferrari are making. Now, when McLaren present their side of the story to the press the same set of people choose not to believe it.

No surprise there then, but nor should it surprise the Ferrari fans that a lot of other people don't like the way Ferrari have behaved either and don't believe that every allegation that they make is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!

---

Coming from you that is priceless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

I hate to break it to you, old bean, but your institutional bias isn't just showing, it's destroying your credibility.

---

It is possible for someone who favours neither McLaren nor Ferrari to have an opinion on the matter, and for that opinion to be that McLaren's version of events is credible in the light of the evidence available thus far. This is certainly my position. Would you accuse me of 'institutional bias'? If you did, you'd be wrong.

If McLaren are guilty because one of their staff got hold of the documents shouldn't Ferrari be responsible because one of their staff gave them away? Not only have they failed to keep control of sensitive material but they've allowed one of their staff to pass these onto another person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Man you are really a legend, a legend of bias!

---

Amazing that you dare even post that!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Funny how you believe him unquestionably....

---

Well it's easily disproved isn't it. According to Martin Brundle's account there were at least 75 people at the hearing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

....funny also that you were willing to have believed Nigel Stepney's claims he was set up (which, of course, Mr Dennis has now confirmed wasn't the case)...

---

I apologise for having an opinion. It seems you don't approve.

Stepney has consistently denied sending the 780-page document to Coughlan. In the light of that it is reasonable to question 'if he didn't send it, who did and why?' Also, where has RD "confirmed" that Stepney wasn't set up? How does he know? Why do you chose to believe him in this instance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

....whilst dismissing Ferrari statements as not been facts.

---

So show where Ferrari have presented facts, as opposed to allegations, that prove McLaren used the 780-page document that were in Coughlan's possession. It is my opinion (apologies again) that Ferrari have used the media very effectively to damage McLaren, and I am not alone in that opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Atleast we Tifosi don't hide our bias.

---

Good for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

I hate to break it to you, old bean, but your institutional bias isn't just showing, it's destroying your credibility.

---

My "credibility", and your opinion of it, matters not one jot, and concerns me even less. What I care about is an open exchange of opinions among those of us who are interested in F1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seppefan

Ferrari it seems will come out of this much the worse for making so many accusations when the whole episode started with them through no fault of theirs.

Ferrari cheated. Stepney blew the whistle. Ferrari realised that Stepney knew too much and tried to scew his integrity by making up the white powder story ( did anyone believe that at the time ?). Then Stepney behaved like a traitor in my view by passing all the docs to Coughlan ( if he did ). Ferrari now try to pass the buck onto McLaren. BS. Sorry but I really hope Ferrari get a wopping penalty for wasting time post the FIA inquiry. Can Brawn seriously return.......

---

I suggest you look up the definitions of "whistleblower" and "spy." You'll find that a whistleblower takes his concerns to the proper authorities while a spy takes his knowledge to a competitor for personal gain. Gee, which one of these definitions does Stepney fit???

Using your logic that Ferrari cheated with the flexible floor (although it wasn't banned until Malaysia) then perhaps we should go back and erase all the wins and points earned with McLaren's "2nd brake pedal." According to your definition, that was also cheating since it was subsequently banned.

The pot should be careful what it calls the kettle!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ian McC

If McLaren are guilty because one of their staff got hold of the documents shouldn't Ferrari be responsible because one of their staff gave them away? Not only have they failed to keep control of sensitive material but they've allowed one of their staff to pass these onto another person.

---

How many times is this question going to be asked?

I'll answer it one more time (and hopefully some of you will read it or pay someone to read it to you if you're not capable.)

Should the victim of a crime receive the same sentence as the criminal? McLaren stood to gain from having Ferrari's data, Ferrari could only lose by having their confidential information stolen and used by someone else!

I chuckled a bit at your twisted thinking as to Stepney "giving them (the documents) away!" It's called stealing - theft occurs when you give something away that is not yours to give away!!!!