Mclaren cleared....for now *merged*

[raphael123]

It's pretty simplistic to say that McLaren haven't used information from Ferrari to improve their car so that makes them innocent. The could also use the information in a detrimental way against Ferrari to hinder them. That would have the same effect! The "flexible floor" was one example, but how do we know that McLaren have not found a way, for example, to make the air flow at the rear of their car "dirtier" in order to exploit a weakness for Ferrari to follow closely at speed? You don't have to incorporate Ferrari's design into a McLaren in order to gain an advantage. You can also exploit Ferrari's weaknesses and you would have all the documentation you need to find out about them!

Very true, but you can't punish a team on an assumption they used the document, or were even aware one of their employee had it until July.

And no one has been able to explain why Mike Coughlan sent his wife to the local library to photocopy it, if McLaren and Ron knew all about it. Surely they would have done it inhouse, not in a public library!!!

[markabilly]

What Ron Dennis is really thinking in his secret confession:


"You ferrari fans are so right, man we did screw up BIG TIME....we were grossly negligent and did make a mistake!!!! When we hired this Mike fellow...we never thought that he would leave stuff like this laying around when shredders are so cheap, to say nothing of melting the old hardrive into molten plastic...if we had known he was that f***ing stupid, we never ever would have hired him"



mokin:

[raphael123]

Well, they've decided not to appeal.



Many impartial observers would say that Benetton was harshly treated by the FIA that year, and that their explanations of the traction control allegations, for example, are plausible.

Can I ask what Benetton's explanation was for having a banned system on their car? And the fuel rig problems too?

Cheers

[raphael123]

"CHASING THAT WHICH CAN NOT BE CAUGHT"

The standard that FIA has declared that must be met is benefit to the team and it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove---given the nature of the infraction, the necessity of being able to compare data to the car's "pre-data" and "post-data" changes (impossible at this stage) to show cause and effect, and even more so, given the absence of such an investigation and examination of the actual cars.....argue all you want, for or against, but if any court of law were to be required to rule based on these facts and this particular standard, the only ruling would be NO BENEFIT PROVED.

Don't mean cheating and a resulting benefit did not happen, only that you can not prove it...it ain't what you know, it is what you can prove....call it justice or call it escaping through a loophole...call it favoritism or whatever. If you accept this standard (benefit) for proof, then the result is and must be NO beneft proved. Period.

My point is that it is the wrong standard--simple possession should suffice and that is all that should be necessary.

If it were necessary to prove that a bike rider actually and truly got faster on a particular day, solely because of doping, then no one could ever be DQ. Never ever.

All that has happened is that everyone is now chasing that which can not be caught. ..talk about clever.... mokin:


so it is very convient "for the good of the sport" to establish a standard of "benefit" that on its face is quite reasonable, yet provides the perfect backdoor to slide out of the mess that would otherwise cost the sport (Bernie) millions of dollars by actually doing something about it....

I think it varies in each circumstance. In cycling, the example you used backs up your arguement very well.

However, we can look at other cases which work in favour of the FIA ruling, for example if we look at the possession of guns, should someone who has access to a gun, be punished as severely as someone who has used a gun? The common sense answer for most would be of course not. With McLaren - they didn't even know one of their employee had the document!

[raphael123]

Do you have proof that things happened the way you believe they happened? I doubt it.

Do you?

[Hawkmoon]

And no one has been able to explain why Mike Coughlan sent his wife to the local library to photocopy it, if McLaren and Ron knew all about it. Surely they would have done it inhouse, not in a public library!!!

This is probably going to get a bit clandestine but photocopiers put a serial number on each page that is copied by them. This serial number identifies which photocopier made the copy and can only be read with the right equipment. It's something that the photocopier manufacturers installed to help fight counterfeiting. If the McLaren copier was used to copy the document then any copies found could be directly traced back to the McLaren copier. That's something that McLaren may well have wanted to avoid.

To be perfectly honest I don't know why Coughlan wanted to make a hard copy at all because the police found the document as a soft copy in his home. Wouldn't it have been easier to just copy the disc?

For those that suggest that if McLaren could be punished for the actions of Coughlan, then so to Ferrari for the actions of Stepney, I think they are missing one thing.

Coughlan would have been acting for the benefit of McLaren were as Stepney would have been acting to the detriment of Ferrari. I think that distinction would prevent any action being taken against Ferrari.

[raphael123]

And you've personally examined their car and data and can verify this...or you're taking McLaren's word for this? I really doubt the FIA tore apart an MP4/22 and F2007 looking for any similarities and then compared all McLaren data from before March with all McLaren data after March. I find it difficult to take the word of ANYONE in big business, Ferrari, McLaren, Enron...

Your in the belief that McLaren should be punished on an 'assumption' then I take it?

[raphael123]

This is probably going to get a bit clandestine but photocopiers put a serial number on each page that is copied by them. This serial number identifies which photocopier made the copy and can only be read with the right equipment. It's something that the photocopier manufacturers installed to help fight counterfeiting. If the McLaren copier was used to copy the document then any copies found could be directly traced back to the McLaren copier. That's something that McLaren may well have wanted to avoid.

To be perfectly honest I don't know why Coughlan wanted to make a hard copy at all because the police found the document as a soft copy in his home. Wouldn't it have been easier to just copy the disc?

For those that suggest that if McLaren could be punished for the actions of Coughlan, then so to Ferrari for the actions of Stepney, I think they are missing one thing.

Coughlan would have been acting for the benefit of McLaren were as Stepney would have been acting to the detriment of Ferrari. I think that distinction would prevent any action being taken against Ferrari.

lol never heard of that. where is this serial number?

and I agree about the fact Ferrari shouldn't be punished for Stepney's action, however Flat Tyre is right, some of the stuff Todt is coming out with is quite laughable. Moaning about being caught bending the rules!

[Hawkmoon]

lol never heard of that. where is this serial number?

I think it's in one of the corners of the page but you can't see it without the right kind of light. You know, like that "magic" ink that you can only see under UV light.

Ron's a crafty bugger. I wouldn't put it past him to have thought of this.

[wmcot]

Very true, but you can't punish a team on an assumption they used the document, or were even aware one of their employee had it until July.

And no one has been able to explain why Mike Coughlan sent his wife to the local library to photocopy it, if McLaren and Ron knew all about it. Surely they would have done it inhouse, not in a public library!!!

Referring to point 1 - Other McLaren employees WERE aware that Coughlan had the document as he has sworn in his affidavit. He showed it to them and even though he said they wanted no part in it, they didn't report it to the authorities. This makes them accomplices by definition.

As for point 2 - This has puzzled me for a couple of reasons. First, who were the copies for? Did Coughlan need more than 1 set of documents? I doubt it. He was making them for someone else, but who?

Secondly, I think (this is my opinion only) that he used a commercial copy center rather than a McLaren-owned copier because either: 1. McLaren would not let him use their equipment for fear of linking themselves to Coughlan's document (knowing what it contained) or 2. Coughlan decided to use an outside copy center for the same reason. If they had been made on McLaren equipment, that would link McLaren more deeply as a conspirator.