Singapore 2008: Briatore and Symmonds resign

[ioan]

There should be a statute of limitations on this stuff. Last year is over.

Crimes of any kind should be investigated whenever they are discovered.
And BTW fixing the result of a sporting event is apparently considered a crime in Singapore (and if I remember rightly people were convicted in Italy to for some football game results being fixed) and the Renault team bosses might risk prison over there.

[Robinho]

from what Symonds has supposedly said perhaps there is enough to suggest that it was a bit more than Piquets normal driving, and as asuch moves have started to hang the guy out to dry - after all he's the guy who carried it out (if it happened), so expect Renault to close ranks and pin it all on Jnr.

[ioan]

from what Symonds has supposedly said perhaps there is enough to suggest that it was a bit more than Piquets normal driving, and as asuch moves have started to hang the guy out to dry - after all he's the guy who carried it out (if it happened), so expect Renault to close ranks and pin it all on Jnr.

Renault staff already made contradictory statements, it's to late to close ranks after you have lied and others know it.

Also it will be a bit difficult to expect others to believe that Alonso's first short stint, decided already Saturday after the qualifying has been masterminded by Piquet Jr. and the team accepted it.

To many things don't add up in this theory that Piquet Jr. is at fault for what happened, one of them being that he wouldn't be as stupid as to go and tell the FIA if he was indeed the one who was behind the whole affair.

Also why is that even though according to Symonds the team knew about what Piquet was up to, they agreed to go ahead with his plan instead of firing him on the very first moment they learned about it?!

Looks to me that either Renault leaves F1 as a result or they will hang Symonds (and maybe Flavio too) out to dry.

[DexDexter]

What court?!
And in a court things aren't black and white either, especially when two of the major players gave contradicting testimony.

If you add the fact that telemetry supports the intended crash accusation than someone's head will fall and I'm sure enough that it will be Symonds one of those to be ousted.

Well this sort of thing can end up in a criminal court very easily. Causing danger etc. If Piquet admits he crashed intentionally, he's in a very vulnerable situation regarding the law, I would think.


It puzzles me that you think lying about this is in some way appropriate.

I didn't mean that. I meant that if you do such a thing, why give contradictory statements afterwards? If you choose the path, you must follow it. Bonus of that would be that Renault would stay in F1. Now we might well see another manufacturer go.

[SGWilko]

Surely you're not suggested Max would use some sort of personal vendetta to remove Ron...sorry...I meant Flavio...

The cross never minded my thought!!!

[truefan72]

I'm tired of this story already. wish it would just go away. There is no way these claims can be even substantiated based on rumor and hearsay. And whatever comments where made a year ago cannot be even taken properly into context this year. It seems to me that piquet knowing that his F1 career is probably over decided to take a parting shot at Renault, along with with Mosley.

To me, if this is prove true, the real culprit would still be piquet as he had the choice not to follow the order and still decided to go crash his car. No matter what the team tells you to do, as a driver, it is your responsibility out on the track to make your decisions. F1 history is full of situations where drivers disobeyed team communications for their own gain, many for much less requests than to crash a car. IF this were true and the order came through the radio, any normal driver's response would be "WTF? I'm not doing that" and then deal with whatever fallout that would come with all the chips on his side if the team tried to take action. It would be the that he would go to the FIa and state his case. not 1year later after many more crashes and a firing for non performance.

As I have said, I don't believe NPJr and find it hard to imagine that Pat Symmonds had anything to do with such a stupid order. All this situation is doing is tainting the sport, and potentially having Renault decide to leave the sport to everyone's detriment, except Max Mosley, who would be happy as can be with no manufacturers in the sport, a single engine supplier and a joke of an F1 series.

[DexDexter]

I know this sounds harsh but as an F1 fan I think F1 and FIA should somehow bury this thing, give golden handshakes or whatever to make this go away. F1 just cannot afford this type of publicity and the possible pull-out by Renault would mean that one team would be without engines and one would be gone altogether. 3 manufacturer-pullouts in a space of one year is too much. Soon there are not enough engines to go around, except archaic Cosworths. IMO Piquet didn't do the thing alone, but it's done, nothing can be done about it now.

[Giuseppe F1]

NELSON PIQUET JR'S STATEMENT TO THE FIA IN FULL:

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns21798.html




Nelson Piquet's FIA statement revealed

The legal statement made to the FIA by Nelson Piquet Jr has been leaked to the F1SA website. It is not clear how this has happened but we believe that the World Council dossier has been sent out and the leak must come from one of the members.

The statement made is as follows:

I, Nelson Angelo Piquet, born July 25, 1985 in Heidelberg, Germany...say as follows:

1. Except as otherwise stated, the facts and statements contained in this Statement are based on facts and matters within my knowledge. I believe such facts and statements contained in this Statement to be true and correct. Where any facts or statements are not within my own knowledge, they are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and, where appropriate, I indicate the source of that knowledge and belief.

2. I make this Statement voluntarily to the FIA and for the purposes of allowing the FIA to exercise its supervisory and regulatory functions with regard to the FIA Formula One World Championship.

3. I am aware that there is a duty upon all participants in the FIA Formula One World Championship and all Super Licence holders to ensure the fairness and legitimacy of the Championship and I am aware that serious consequences could follow if I were to provide the FIA with any false or misleading statement.

4. I understand that my complete statement has been recorded on audio tape and that a full transcript of my audio recording will be made available to me and the FIA. The present document constitutes a summary of the main points made during my full oral statement.

5. I wish to bring the following facts to the FIA’s attention.

6. During the Formula One Grand Prix of Singapore, held on 28 September 2008 and counting towards the 2008 FIA Formula One World Championship, I was asked by Mr. Flavio Briatore, who is both my manager and the Team Principal of the ING Renault F1 Team, and by Mr. Pat Symonds, the Technical Director of the Renault F1 Team, to deliberately crash my car in order to positively influence the performance of the ING Renault F1 Team at the event in question. I agreed to this proposal and caused my car to hit a wall and crash during lap thirteen/fourteen of the race.

7. The proposal to deliberately cause an accident was made to me shortly before the race took place, when I was summoned by Mr. Briatore and Mr. Symonds in Mr. Briatore’s office. Mr. Symonds, in the presence of Mr. Briatore, asked me if I would be willing to sacrifice my race for the team by “causing a safety car”. Every F1 race driver knows that the safety car is deployed on a track when there is an accident which leads to the track being blocked either by debris or a stationary car, and where it is difficult to recover a damaged car, as was the case here.

8. At the time of this conversation I was in a very fragile and emotional state of mind. This state of mind was brought about by intense stress due to the fact that Mr. Briatore had refused to inform me of whether or not my driver’s contract would be renewed for the next racing year (2009), as is customarily the case in the middle of the year (around July or August). Instead, Mr. Briatore repeatedly requested me to sign an “option”, which meant that I was not allowed to negotiate with any other teams in the meantime. He would repeatedly put pressure on me to prolong the option I had signed, and would regularly summon me into his office to discuss these renewals, even on racing days – a moment which should be a moment of concentration and relaxation before the race. This stress was accentuated by the fact that during the Formula One Grand Prix of Singapore I had qualified sixteenth on the grid, so I was very insecure about my future at the Renault team. When I was asked to crash my car and cause a safety car incident in order to help the team, I accepted because I hoped that it could improve my position within the team at this critical time in the race season. At no point was I told by anyone that by agreeing to cause an incident, I would be guaranteed a renewal of my contract or any other advantage. However, in the context, I thought that it would be helpful in achieving this goal. I therefore agreed to cause the incident.

9. After the meeting with Mr. Symonds and Mr. Briatore, Mr. Symonds took me aside to a quiet corner and, using a map, pointed me to the exact corner of the track where I should crash. This corner was selected because the specific location of the track did not have any cranes that would allow a damaged car to be swiftly lifted off the track, nor did it have any side entrances to the track, which would allow a Safety Marshall to quickly move the damaged car away from the track. Therefore, it was felt that a crash in this specific position would be nearly certain to cause an obstruction on the track which would thus necessitate the deployment of a safety car in order to allow the track to be cleared and to ensure the safe continuation of the race.

[]B10. Mr. Symonds also told me which exact lap to cause the incident upon, so that a strategy could deployed for my team-mate Mr. Fernando Alonso to refuel at the pit shortly before the deployment of the safety car, which he indeed did during lap twelve. The key to this strategy resided in the fact that the near-knowledge that the safety car would be deployed in lap thirteen/fourteen allowed the Team to start Mr. Alonso’s car with an aggressive fuel strategy using a light car containing enough fuel to arrive at lap twelve, but not much more. This would allow Mr. Alonso to overtake as many (heavier) cars as possible, knowing that those cars would have difficulty catching up with him later in the race due to the later deployment of the safety car. This strategy was successful and Mr. Alonso won the 2008 Formula One Grand Prix of Singapore.[/B]

11. During these discussions, no mention was made of any concerns with respect to the security implications of this strategy, either for myself, the public or other drivers. The only comment made in this context was one by Mr. Pat Symonds who warned me to “be careful”, which I took to mean that I should not injure myself.

12. I intentionally caused the crash by letting go of control of the car just before the relevant corner. In order to make sure I would cause the incident during the correct lap, I asked my team several times via the radio to confirm the lap number, which I would not normally do. I was not injured during the accident, nor was anyone else.

13. After the discussions with Mr. Briatore and Mr. Symonds discussed above, the ‘accident strategy’ was never discussed again with either of them. Mr. Briatore discreetly said “thank you” after the end of the race, without mentioning anything further. I do not know if anyone else was aware of this strategy at the start of the race.

14. After the race I informed Mr. Felipe Vargas, a family friend and advisor, of the fact that the incident had been deliberate. Mr. Vargas further infirmed my father, Mr. Nelson Piquet, some time later.

15. After the race several journalists asked questions about the accident and asked me whether I had caused it on purpose, because they felt it was ‘suspicious’.

16. In my own team, the engineer of my car questioned the nature of the incident because he found it unusual, and I replied that I had lost control of the car. I believe that a clever engineer would notice from the car’s telemetry that I caused the incident on purpose as I continued accelerating , whereas a “normal” reaction would be to brake as soon as possible.

Statement of Truth

I believe and swear that the facts set out in this statement are true.

This statement was made at the FIA Headquarters in Paris on 30 July 2009 in presence of Mr. Alan Donnelly (FIA Chairman of the Stewards), Mr. Martin Smith and Mr. Jacob Marsh (both of investigations firm Quest, retained by the FIA to assist with its investigation). Notes were taken by Ms. Domenique Costesec (Sidley Austin LLP).

Signed:

Nelson Piquet Jr.

[Sonic]

I want to be angry, but all I can manage at the moment is sadness that my sport has been sullied by the combined actions of a clueless team owner, a desperate technical director and a foolish driver.

When this first broke I believed (hoped) that there was no foundation to the rumor, however it seems the rules of fair play and sportsmanship mean nothing to these people :(

[ioan]

I know this sounds harsh but as an F1 fan I think F1 and FIA should somehow bury this thing, give golden handshakes ...

You mean golden handcuffs?!

[ioan]

I want to be angry, but all I can manage at the moment is sadness that my sport has been sullied by the combined actions of a clueless team owner...

A clues team boss, and I'm sure that the team owner are getting their axe sharpened right now.

[ioan]

I was going to come up with a sentence involving showers, but that not appropiate.. :p

You lil' perv. :mad: :D

[DexDexter]

I was going to come up with a sentence involving showers, but that not appropiate.. :p

:D :D

[DexDexter]

http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-briatore-grilled-by-renault-boss/

This is getting ever more serious, Renault is grilling Flavio, alive! :eek:

[truefan72]

that statement from NpJr is what I expected
1. no real evidence other than his word
2. and admission that he was not guranteed anything ni return for crashing the car and he did so thinking it would help his case with the team (obviously this backfired)
3. nothing apart fro his tleemetry to back up his claim
4. the 360 days it took him to come forward...incidentaly after his team's dismissal.

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.

[ioan]

Renault have to chose between throwing Flavio and Symonds out or taking legal action against Piquet.

However they will have to weight their options very well because they can not throw Flav out nor take Piquet to court without knowing what exactly are the proof that the FIA has managed to amass against them.
If they throw Flav to the dogs than they actually accept that he and implicitly the team cheated.
If they take Piquet to the court and it turns out that indeed Flav and Symonds concocted the plan than they will not only lose face in F1 but also in a court of law.

Tough decision to make Mr. Ghosn.

[ioan]

that statement from NpJr is what I expected
1. no real evidence other than his word

Not really, telemtry and radio recordings support his version of the story.


2. and admission that he was not guranteed anything ni return for crashing the car and he did so thinking it would help his case with the team (obviously this backfired)

A very smart statement because if he says he did it because they promised him to sign him than he's done too.



3. nothing apart fro his tleemetry to back up his claim

+ pit wall radio records. More than enough as he can't fabricate any of them.


4. the 360 days it took him to come forward...incidentaly after his team's dismissal.

The facts were reported to the FIA days before he was sacked. :)

I suppose you are afraid that Alonso might get dragged into the mud in this case. Do not worry none of the parties have said anything about Alonso being involved in this plan. Also the FIA will protect him as they need him to make things interesting in the future, hopefully on the track.

[Sonic]

A clues team boss, and I'm sure that the team owner are getting their axe sharpened right now.

I'm sure I can be forgiven the ill worded title I gave Mr Briatore, the sentement is still the same.

[ioan]

I'm sure I can be forgiven the ill worded title I gave Mr Briatore, the sentement is still the same.

Yep, his title does not change his nature.

[truefan72]

what radio communications?

I have not read anywhere about radio communications, nor where any mentioned in his sworn statement. The only thing we have is his word ioan. and nothing else. If there were radio communications, it would have been brought to light 360 days ago when certain drivers questioned the timing and the FIA had every right and reason to request them. Even by NPJr own words he says the matter was not discussed again and only got a thank you from Flav after the race (which to me sounded like a cynical thanks rather than a sincere appreciation)

So where are these pitwall & radio communications that you mention and what exactly does the telemetry show.

may I remind you that telemetry would indicate kubica accelerating to the wall in canada, Alonso accelerating in Japan 2007, that kimi would have had unusual telemetry in a couple of his crashes (including monaco where it could be interpreted as deliberate if you took NPJr word for telemetry readings) or massa in silverstote last year, based on telemetry would have looked deliberate 3-4 times. spinning on a spot where others didn't in a slow funny fashion. So let'snot get excited about telemetry here because, it can be twisted to look anyway you want it too.

[ioan]

what radio communications?

I have not read anywhere about radio communications, nor where any mentioned in his sworn statement. The only thing we have is his word ioan. and nothing else. If there were radio communications, it would have been brought to light 360 days ago when certain drivers questioned the timing and the FIA had every right and reason to request them. Even by NPJr own words he says the matter was not discussed again and only got a thank you from Flav after the race (which to me sounded like a cynical thanks rather than a sincere appreciation)

So where are these pitwall & radio communications that you mention and what exactly does the telemetry show.

may I remind you that telemetry would indicate kubica accelerating to the wall in canada, Alonso accelerating in Japan 2007, that kimi would have had unusual telemetry in a couple of his crashes (including monaco where it could be interpreted as deliberate if you took NPJr word for telemetry readings) or massa in silverstote last year, based on telemetry would have looked deliberate 3-4 times. spinning on a spot where others didn't in a slow funny fashion. So let'snot get excited about telemetry here because, it can be twisted to look anyway you want it too.

Don't get so worked up.

There's plenty of articles around about this story. Everything is in there.

[CNR]

Q: what team would keep a driver that offered to crash the car before the race then did crash the car why did they not report him and drop him from the team ?

http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/files/2005/07/question_mark_2.jpg

[Somebody]

Why the hell do some people here want this swept under the carpet?!

If a team has engaged in race-fixing, that's a CRIMINAL OFFENCE in most countries these days.

[ioan]

Q: what team would keep a driver that offered to crash the car before the race then did crash the car why did they not report him and drop him from the team ?

Exactly. This proves that the teams is at fault even if this would have been Jr's idea, which I doubt.

[ioan]

Why the hell do some people here want this swept under the carpet?!

If a team has engaged in race-fixing, that's a CRIMINAL OFFENCE in most countries these days.

Why? Because accepting the reality that does not suit their reality might be very very difficult, sometimes, impossible for some people. It's all about the human nature.

We see this kind of reaction every time something unusual happens.

[DexDexter]

Why the hell do some people here want this swept under the carpet?!

If a team has engaged in race-fixing, that's a CRIMINAL OFFENCE in most countries these days.

My reason for wanting that is the fear of losing another manufacturer which would be very bad for F1. I couln't care less about Piquet or Flavio & Symonds, I just feel that their stupid actions shouldn't be dealt in a way that results in an unnecessary withdrawal of Renault. Punishments? Yes, but somewhere where there are no cameras, not all "trials" have to be public.

[Dave B]

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.

[leopard]

I'd rather have opinion that team order is internal affair of teams. Race stewards and none of us notice something wrong with Piquet crash and consider it pure incident, unless one history doer, NPJr supposedly, announce it to public. The occurrence has been good a while, hence this case is already beyond its limitation period.

No one can say something by way of prohibition on him not to disclose the problem to public, this is more about character of personal of a driver. Once he agreed something he should keep the commitment and any form of information leakage is not justifiable.

However, there are different fashions commonly acceptable to translate team strategy other than crash order.
This is understandable for Alonso, a two times champion that the classic problem of him is asking team for number one status. Never rate yourself too high... ;)

[ArrowsFA1]

Comments from the drivers in Thursday's press conference:



Q. (Ian Parkes – The Press Association) Gentlemen, I'm sure you're all aware of the ongoing Renault situation at the moment. Could I just get a general perspective from all five of you? Are you surprised that something like that could happen in this sport, or does nothing surprise you in F1 anymore?
Rubens Barrichello: Well, it's quite difficult to think that somebody would crash a car because he was told to. Very realistically speaking, I think it's easier to crash a Formula One car than drive a Formula One car, that's a fair point, because of the amount of power and everything. It's very easy to crash the car. But to get to that point, I was put into a situation in Austria which was the limit of the limit. There were eight laps of conversation, the conversation going on and things were said to me that I had to give up, but I had to give up in front of everyone, everyone knew what was going on there. It's very, very sad. If that's true, it's very, very sad. The only thing I can see is that somebody wants Briatore's head, that's all I can see now, because it sounds very strange.
Robert Kubica: I would prefer not to comment.
Vitantonio Liuzzi: There's definitely a very fine line; it's very difficult to believe, as Rubens said, that somebody would crash on purpose. It's a difficult thing to believe that something would have been started like that but for sure, it's a really soft thing to touch. It's not a good thing for the sport if it's true, and hopefully it will never happen again.
Giancarlo Fisichella: I don't have a lot to say, because now they are investigating and until that happens, I don't want to say anything.
Jarno Trulli: There's very little to say. There is an investigation and we will find out what happened later. Honestly, we can only read a little but no more.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78465

[leopard]

I found race technical analysis on it, Is it a correct link?... ;)

[Dave B]

I'd rather have opinion that team order is internal affair of teams.
Except that it would be a clear breach of therules (http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/AAE9C10693C293F7C12575AF004512DC/$FILE/1-2009%20F1%20SPORTING%20REGULATIONS%20(Showing%20Al terations)%2024-03-2009.pdf). "39.1: Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited". That's black and white.


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.

[ioan]

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.

[ioan]

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.

[ArrowsFA1]

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

[Dave B]

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

[555-04Q2]

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

Time to find another formula to watch.

[Big Ben]

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.

[ioan]

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. :\

[ioan]

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:

[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:

[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?

[alcatrazhack]

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.

[SGWilko]

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....

[alcatrazhack]

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.

[SGWilko]

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!

[alcatrazhack]

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.

[ArrowsFA1]

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/motorsport/formula_one/8250436.stm

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

[Dave B]

Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

[Dave B]

From the Autosport article:


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"?

[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?

[SGWilko]

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.

[Sonic]

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? ;)

[SGWilko]

Most likely.

Ps is flavspeak similar to rontalk? ;)

Other way round

Flavtalk = Ronspeak but not equal to Abespeak!!

[ioan]

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.

[SGWilko]

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?

[ioan]

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.

[ioan]

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.

[ioan]

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

[ArrowsFA1]

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.

[Dave B]

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.


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/hampshire/8250042.stm

[Dave B]

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 :

[christophulus]

Interview with Max:

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


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!

[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

[Knock-on]

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.

[SGWilko]

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.

[SGWilko]

Peckham Spring Water .

Cushty.

[Dave B]

Nelson you plonker! :p

[Knock-on]

<Snr to Jnr>

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

[SGWilko]

<Snr to Jnr>

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

Defense de fumer! He who dares wins.

[I am evil Homer]

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.

[ArrowsFA1]

But that will not happen, because Max has given them (Jnr, certainly) immunity.
So if Nelson made this up (in a fit of pique perhaps) because he knew he was going to be dropped by the team, and that is proved during the WMSC hearing, he gets off scott free? :crazy:

What is this with the FIA and immunity? Surely, if allegations are made then they should be investigated certainly. But in this case it seems to be one side's word against the other and until the facts are examined why should one party be granted immunity?

If these are made up allegations then isn't that bringing the sport into disrepute and subject to Article 151c of the FIA regulations?

[SGWilko]

So if Nelson made this up (in a fit of pique perhaps) because he knew he was going to be dropped by the team, and that is proved during the WMSC hearing, he gets off scott free? :crazy:

What is this with the FIA and immunity? Surely, if allegations are made then they should be investigated certainly. But in this case it seems to be one side's word against the other and until the facts are examined why should one party be granted immunity?

If these are made up allegations then isn't that bringing the sport into disrepute and subject to Article 151c of the FIA regulations?

If I were Renault, and they get exhonorated - I'd be baying for both Jnr & Snr's heads on a plate. I'd then have glee in inserted said heads up their respective owners rear passages......

[Dave B]

Max says (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78489):
We have said to him [Piquet] 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. It is exactly the same as it was for Alonso.
So presumably if it turns out Piquet Jnr was telling porkies, his immunity is worth nothing. As it should be.

[I am evil Homer]

If they're found to be lying no one would touch Nelsinho as a potential driver and Snr should be blocked from any sort of team ownership/management

[Knock-on]

I still want confirmation that Flav says it's bollocks, Pat said it happened but was Jn'r idea and Jn'r saying it was the other 2.

If the conversation and consequent crash happened, then isn't who suggested it originally rather a moot point. They are all complicit and should be banned.

I know Jn'r has imunity but he will never get another F1 drive.



I loved this quote from Max in Autosport.

"Certainly they should tell the truth, but what that is, I would not speculate."

Never a truer sentence from Mad Max He wouldn't know the truth if it slapped him in the face :laugh:

[ArrowsFA1]

I loved this quote from Max in Autosport.
There are a couple more Maxism gems in there as well, but this is neither the time or the place :p

[ozrevhead]

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.
so if thats the case why would he want to make it up when he has too much to lose

Renault will turn this on NPJ wheather they are innocent or not because its p--- easy for a company to go after a individual

[Dave B]

The full Q&A with Max, from which I pulled the quote above, makes fascinating reading:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78489

[ioan]

So if Nelson made this up (in a fit of pique perhaps) because he knew he was going to be dropped by the team, and that is proved during the WMSC hearing, he gets off scott free? :crazy:

What is this with the FIA and immunity? Surely, if allegations are made then they should be investigated certainly. But in this case it seems to be one side's word against the other and until the facts are examined why should one party be granted immunity?

If these are made up allegations then isn't that bringing the sport into disrepute and subject to Article 151c of the FIA regulations?

I don't remember such opinion being aired when Alonso and Hamilton were granted immunity back in 2007 and even given the chance to fight for the WDC title while the team was cheating! :\

Let's try to judge everyone with the same set of principles.

[ioan]

Max says (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78489):
So presumably if it turns out Piquet Jnr was telling porkies, his immunity is worth nothing. As it should be.

Exactly. And I suppose that Jr is bright enough to realize that and stick to telling the truth.

[ioan]

so if thats the case why would he want to make it up when he has too much to lose

Renault will turn this on NPJ wheather they are innocent or not because its p--- easy for a company to go after a individual

You are right, and that's also why Renault will only take legal action against Piquet in a French court and not anywhere else.

[ozrevhead]

You are right, and that's also why Renault will only take legal action against Piquet in a French court and not anywhere else.
beg my pardon for my ignorace but why a french court

[ArrowsFA1]

I don't remember such opinion being aired...
I thought the issue of the FIA granting immunity was odd then, and I do now, although the circumstances are slightly different.

A couple of years ago immunity was used as an inducement by the FIA to get information. Here they have granted immunity after receiving information.

[ozrevhead]

Sounds to me Renault doth protest too much

[ioan]

A couple of years ago immunity was used as an inducement by the FIA to get information. Here they have granted immunity after receiving information.

How do we know that Piquet didn't ask for immunity before spilling the beans?
Looks to me, from Max' statement, that Jr was granted immunity in case he tells the truth which implies that he was first granted immunity and than told the truth as the other way around isn't logic.

[truefan72]

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.
perhaps it is all true

before the race in their usual meeting, NpJr brought up the idea, symmonds and flav said it is out of bounds, NPJr did it anyway and that is that. from flav's perspective, they did not discuss it, because it was NPJr who brought it up and they shot it down. From Pat S. view, it was discussed in the context that nelshino brought it up and they shot it down, from NPJr's point it was discussed and in his fragile state of mind believes that is what the team wanted from him as in his testimony it seems like he inferred a lot of things.

[ArrowsFA1]

How do we know that Piquet didn't ask for immunity before spilling the beans?
Fair point. We don't know one way or another. All we have is Max's comment that "he has been told that if he tells us the truth then he will not be proceeded against individually".

[truefan72]

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.


and that's why the whole thing shoyuld just go away. it is a he said she said thing of the past that has no bearing on the sport and only serves to further demean F1. There really wasn't enough evidence to go forward and there is plausible deniabilty on either side so why bother. It really is an internal renault matter that has spilled over to the public light, which mosley is all too happy to oblige at is is an opportunity to dirty up or scandalize one of his chief nemesis. This is like a celebrity divorce case played out in public with a corrupt court with an axe to grind

[ioan]

Fair point. We don't know one way or another. All we have is Max's comment that "he has been told that if he tells us the truth then he will not be proceeded against individually".

Which makes it clear that he was told something before he was going to give his side of the story and that he was expected to say the truth if he wanted the immunity.

[Knock-on]

perhaps it is all true

before the race in their usual meeting, NpJr brought up the idea, symmonds and flav said it is out of bounds, NPJr did it anyway and that is that. from flav's perspective, they did not discuss it, because it was NPJr who brought it up and they shot it down. From Pat S. view, it was discussed in the context that nelshino brought it up and they shot it down, from NPJr's point it was discussed and in his fragile state of mind believes that is what the team wanted from him as in his testimony it seems like he inferred a lot of things.

1. As I read it, it wasn't a "normal" meeting
2. If it was brought up and shot down, then it was raised and discussed.
3. The fact that it was discussed, happened, ignored and not reported is the crux of the matter. It cannot be ignored.

I never knew you were such a Renault fan TrueFan and cannot see why you are trying to brush this under the carpet.

When McLaren were mooted with wrongdoing, I was loud in calling for a full investigation. When they were guilty, I accepted their punishment (althought I questioned the size of the fine).

They did wrong, they were punished and I never tried to ignore the facts or sweep it under the carpet. They have paid their price and I still support them but what happened was wrong and they deserved their ass kicked.

IF Renault are in the wrong, and IF this happened as Jn'r says, then Flav, Jn'r and Pat are finished. However, we need an full and fair investigation.

[ioan]

Make yourself a copy and prepare for a long and interesting read containing Jr's testimony, Symonds interrogatory, telemetry data and the transcript of an interesting radio discussion between Symonds and Alonso's race engineer where Symonds is trying to convince the engineer that pitting on lap 12 is the right thing to do.

Don't know who wrote this article, I just ran into it, but at least it contains most of what it's know until now.

http://axisofoversteer.com/blog/documents/Fit%20Of%20PK.pdf

[gm99]

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.



Certainly in Austria, it is possible to send a "statement of fact" to the prosecutor's office and unless it's totally bogus, the authorities have to look into it and start an investigation.

As to why Renault is doing that in France and not Switzerland: Do you seriously think you can just go to the authorities in any country of your choice and ask them to start a criminal investigation even if that country is in no way involved in it? Usually in criminal law, a country has to have jurisdiction to start an investigation. Most commonly, jurisdiction lies with the country where either the (alleged) criminal act was committed or the result of the crime occured or should have occured. As the Piquets allegedly tried to blackmail Renault, which is a French company, it seems to be France would have jurisdiction. Switzerland certainly doesn't, unless the alleged blackmailing attempt took place there.

[ioan]

Certainly in Austria, it is possible to send a "statement of fact" to the prosecutor's office and unless it's totally bogus, the authorities have to look into it and start an investigation.

As to why Renault is doing that in France and not Switzerland: Do you seriously think you can just go to the authorities in any country of your choice and ask them to start a criminal investigation even if that country is in no way involved in it? Usually in criminal law, a country has to have jurisdiction to start an investigation. Most commonly, jurisdiction lies with the country where either the (alleged) criminal act was committed or the result of the crime occured or should have occured. As the Piquets allegedly tried to blackmail Renault, which is a French company, it seems to be France would have jurisdiction. Switzerland certainly doesn't, unless the alleged blackmailing attempt took place there.

And what Jurisdiction does France have over the Singapore GP or over Piquet?!

And what kind of criminal act has Piquet committed against Renault to allow them to even ask for a criminal investigation?

Anyway even if by chance they are found to be at fault by the French court the Piquets can start their own counter legal action in a Brazilian court and so on. I still stand by my opinion that Renault are trying to intimidate the Piquets whom I doubt that feel very much intimidated given the situation is now anyway driven by the FIA and not themselves.

[gm99]

And what Jurisdiction does France have over the Singapore GP or over Piquet?!

And what kind of criminal act has Piquet committed against Renault to allow them to even ask for a criminal investigation?

The investigation apparently is not about the Singapore GP, but about an alleged (as I wrote repeatedly) blackmail attempt by the Piquets some time later-pressumably shortly before they went to the FIA this July - that they would spill the beans on Singapore unless Jr. was allowed to continue to drive for Renault throughout 2009.

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/152146/1/renault_initiates_legal_action_amid_blackmail_clai ms.html

France's jurisdiction would, as I have tried to point out already, be based on a French company (Renault) being the victim of said blackmail attempt.

[V12]

Make yourself a copy and prepare for a long and interesting read containing Jr's testimony, Symonds interrogatory, telemetry data and the transcript of an interesting radio discussion between Symonds and Alonso's race engineer where Symonds is trying to convince the engineer that pitting on lap 12 is the right thing to do.

Don't know who wrote this article, I just ran into it, but at least it contains most of what it's know until now.

http://axisofoversteer.com/blog/documents/Fit%20Of%20PK.pdf

Thanks for finding that, great read :up:

[ArrowsFA1]

Alleged race fixing, blackmail, immunity, leaks, court cases...

A fine mess this is :rolleyes:

[ioan]

The investigation apparently is not about the Singapore GP, but about an alleged (as I wrote repeatedly) blackmail attempt by the Piquets some time later-pressumably shortly before they went to the FIA this July - that they would spill the beans on Singapore unless Jr. was allowed to continue to drive for Renault throughout 2009.

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/152146/1/renault_initiates_legal_action_amid_blackmail_clai ms.html

France's jurisdiction would, as I have tried to point out already, be based on a French company (Renault) being the victim of said blackmail attempt.

That begs the question why didn't Renault start this legal action back then if they were REALLY trying to blackmail them?!

There's to many questions asked and way to few answers from the Renault camp.

[Sonic]

That begs the question why didn't Renault start this legal action back then if they were REALLY trying to blackmail them?!

There's to many questions asked and way to few answers from the Renault camp.

This really is a key to all of this. Taking all these fragments of info and putting them together we can infer that because PK jnr told Bernie back in Monaco we can suggest that the possible blackmail happened sometime shortly after that. Therefore there can only be two possible reasons IMO that Renault did not sack PK straight away and start law suits there and then;

1. There was NO blackmail attempt

2. Renault believed there was no evidence to prove the PK's claims.

As I do not believe Renault could have failed to know that the radio logs/data from the crash all pointed the finger straight at Renault logic dictates there never was a blackmail attempt.

Its all wild guess work of course but there's no smoke with out fire as the old expression goes.

[ioan]

Looks like Piquet got some balls at least comparable with those of Lewy:



GO TO EARLIER STORY GO TO THE NEWS INDEX GO TO NEXT STORY
Piquet 'will not be bullied' by Renault

By Pablo Elizalde Friday, September 11th 2009, 15:53 GMT

Nelson Piquet says he will not be "bullied again into making a decision I regret" after claiming he has nothing to fear following his accusations against the Renault team.

The French squad announced on Friday that it was launching criminal action against Piquet and his father, accusing the duo of attempting to blackmail the team with accusations of race-fixing at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

On Friday afternoon, Piquet Jr issued a statement saying he has nothing to fear despite Renault's legal action, the Brazilian claiming he had told the FIA the truth.

"Regarding the current FIA investigation, I confirm that I have co-operated fully and honestly with the sport's governing body," said Piquet in the statement.

"Because I am telling the truth I have nothing to fear, whether from the ING Renault Team or Mr Briatore and whilst I am well aware of the power and influence of those being investigated, and the vast resources at their disposal, I will not be bullied again into making a decision I regret.

"I have every confidence in the FIA investigation and World Motor Sport Council and I will be making no further comment until the conclusion of the hearing of 21 September 2009."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78511

[SGWilko]

Looks like Piquet got some balls at least comparable with those of Lewy:



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78511

Zowey Cavey! This is better than Crossroads and Take The High Road put together!!!! ;)

[christophulus]

Make yourself a copy and prepare for a long and interesting read containing Jr's testimony, Symonds interrogatory, telemetry data and the transcript of an interesting radio discussion between Symonds and Alonso's race engineer where Symonds is trying to convince the engineer that pitting on lap 12 is the right thing to do.

Don't know who wrote this article, I just ran into it, but at least it contains most of what it's know until now.

http://axisofoversteer.com/blog/documents/Fit%20Of%20PK.pdf

Good read :up:

Certainly seems to incriminate them. Telemetry seems odd and Symonds was being very evasive. If there was no conspiracy he'd have said so, surely? There is nothing to gain from being cagey about answering, it just means the FIA will be even more suspicious.

I don't really know what to say now. So IF it's true: Symonds is acting as a fall guy for Briatore, Piquet Jr. is finished as an F1 driver, Renault are either going to leave the sport or be kicked out. Real shame for the 99% of honest staff who've apparently been screwed over by their corrupt bosses. (if if if if if it's true!)

[gm99]

That begs the question why didn't Renault start this legal action back then if they were REALLY trying to blackmail them?!

There's to many questions asked and way to few answers from the Renault camp.

Talking of questions, these come to my mind:

The relationship between Renault (or at least Briatore) and Piquet Jr. was already damaged by Singapore 2008 (Jr. admitts as much in his leaked statement) and Renault must have been aware by that time that Piquet would leave (or be forced to leave) the team before too long. Why give him ammunition by ordering him to crash?

Knowing that Piquet had this damaging information and would most likely take it to the FIA once fired by Renault, why did they still terminate his contract? It would have been safer to end the relationship on a mutual agreement, which probably would have meant a substantial sum of money for the Piquets in exchange for keeping their mouths shut about the whole issue.

IMO, there are only two possible answers:
a) Renault did not believe anyone would believe Piquet for whatever reason
b) Renault knows Piquet's claims to be untrue.

For the record, I have no clue about what the answer may be. Originally, I thought the allegation to be bogus, but meanwhile I'm not sure about that. Certainly Pat Symonds in the link ioan posted somewhere above doesn't come across as very convincing with all of his "I don't recall" and "I'd rather not answer that".

[ozrevhead]

I then go back to my orginal question gm99

Knowing that it would ruin his career, his rep and probally his life (be honest who in their right mind would hire him after this regardless of it being racing related or not ) why make this up?

his evidence is to elaborate and detalied to be made up

[Valve Bounce]

Make yourself a copy and prepare for a long and interesting read containing Jr's testimony, Symonds interrogatory, telemetry data and the transcript of an interesting radio discussion between Symonds and Alonso's race engineer where Symonds is trying to convince the engineer that pitting on lap 12 is the right thing to do.

Don't know who wrote this article, I just ran into it, but at least it contains most of what it's know until now.

http://axisofoversteer.com/blog/documents/Fit%20Of%20PK.pdf

Thanks for the heads up. What a great find.
Having read the report, I would be very surprised if Pat Symonds turns up in Singapore; or even Briatore for that matter. They do allow betting in Singapore and there is every chance both could be arrested by the ICAC there on arrival. I wouldn't even be surprised if the Renault cars are impounded.

No need for me to say what I feel about the alleged conspiracy, or alleged instructions given to Piquet Jr by Symonds. I doubt anyone, having read ioan's linked article, would have any doubts.

I hope Symonds likes Singapore noodles, because if he turns up in Singapore, he'd better get used to it.

[Valve Bounce]

and that's why the whole thing shoyuld just go away. it is a he said she said thing of the past that has no bearing on the sport and only serves to further demean F1. There really wasn't enough evidence to go forward and there is plausible deniabilty on either side so why bother. It really is an internal renault matter that has spilled over to the public light, which mosley is all too happy to oblige at is is an opportunity to dirty up or scandalize one of his chief nemesis. This is like a celebrity divorce case played out in public with a corrupt court with an axe to grind

If you read teh article in the link given by ioan, then you will realise this a far more than just he says she says. There is a helluva lot of evidence to support Piquet Jr's side and from Pat Symonds reluctance to answer any questions, it sis easy to see who is being evasive and where the evidence is leading to.

If you havn't read the article, then it is in my quote just above this post.

[Dave B]

They're buggered either way. Even if it was purely Piquet's idea and his alone, the fact that Symonds admits he was aware of the suggestion would damn him. Symonds would have had an obligation to inform the FIA, and the fact that he appears to have chosen to cover the matter up is - in itself - unforgivable.

[truefan72]

1. As I read it, it wasn't a "normal" meeting
2. If it was brought up and shot down, then it was raised and discussed.
3. The fact that it was discussed, happened, ignored and not reported is the crux of the matter. It cannot be ignored.

I never knew you were such a Renault fan TrueFan and cannot see why you are trying to brush this under the carpet.

When McLaren were mooted with wrongdoing, I was loud in calling for a full investigation. When they were guilty, I accepted their punishment (althought I questioned the size of the fine).

They did wrong, they were punished and I never tried to ignore the facts or sweep it under the carpet. They have paid their price and I still support them but what happened was wrong and they deserved their ass kicked.

IF Renault are in the wrong, and IF this happened as Jn'r says, then Flav, Jn'r and Pat are finished. However, we need an full and fair investigation.

I'm not a renault fan, but I am a fan of logic and reason. I cannot fathom that Renault,not fighting for a championship, in a terrible year, will all out of a sudden choose to instigate a situation that could easily backfire, and cost them a $100 mil fine, removal from the sport and about 400 jobs to give Alonso a race win at the latter stage of a meaningless seaosn to them, in a situation that could not even gurantee them the victory. Or I can see NPJr and his father figure out some way to save a seat in F1 by any means necessery and try and hold a team hostage. Given flav's history and management and just after releasing a rooke for not performing, I found it confusing as tyo why Piquet was retained for 2009 having an even worse year then kovy and a highlight reel of embarrasing incidents to last a career.

Then bring forth the claim once he got fired a year after the fact along with his father making statements to bernie who just happens to be close to briatore and are in fact business partners.

so IMO it seems more likely that the piquets are up to no good (knowing his fathers antics too in the past) rather than Renault risking their entire race organization for a meaningless victory in an already lost season.

[truefan72]

That begs the question why didn't Renault start this legal action back then if they were REALLY trying to blackmail them?!

There's to many questions asked and way to few answers from the Renault camp.


why does it take anyone a while to press charges or report a blackmailing. Usually they try to resolve it internally, but the timing seems like Renault just had about enough of the piquets and fired him after it looked like they were going to go forward with this nonsense.

If they did not fire him, they could not press charges because it would seem odd and the last thing they wanted would be a circus.

If you compare it to the Mclaren situation, if they did not fire him and he was granted immunity, as with alonso, then the team would have been forced to continue employing Piquet while the proceedings went on, including his immunity and thus forcing the team to have fIA inspectors at every subsequent race to make sure he was getting "fair treatment" under that scenario, Piquet gets what he wants, which is to drive for the remainder of 2009, look like a victim and create an untenable situation for the team.

So from their perspective it was a preemptive move while they still has some control of the situation. That would also explain why Britore simply left the paddock in hungary as he couldn't even stomach it to feing any interest in NPJr racing.

[BDunnell]

That begs the question why didn't Renault start this legal action back then if they were REALLY trying to blackmail them?!

There's to many questions asked and way to few answers from the Renault camp.

The answer to both those questions is quite simple — that their lawyers will have advised against starting the legal action until a certain point and saying too much at this stage.

Whatever transpires, this is one of the most fantastically absurd situations ever to have arisen in F1, but let's not pretend that it will do the sport any serious damage. It is now clear, surely, that nothing much does. The McLaren and Mosley scandals have obviously not harmed the sport one iota, despite what some of the more pompous observers, or those with a particular axe to grind, might say.

[truefan72]

Talking of questions, these come to my mind:

The relationship between Renault (or at least Briatore) and Piquet Jr. was already damaged by Singapore 2008 (Jr. admitts as much in his leaked statement) and Renault must have been aware by that time that Piquet would leave (or be forced to leave) the team before too long. Why give him ammunition by ordering him to crash?

Knowing that Piquet had this damaging information and would most likely take it to the FIA once fired by Renault, why did they still terminate his contract? It would have been safer to end the relationship on a mutual agreement, which probably would have meant a substantial sum of money for the Piquets in exchange for keeping their mouths shut about the whole issue.

IMO, there are only two possible answers:
a) Renault did not believe anyone would believe Piquet for whatever reason
b) Renault knows Piquet's claims to be untrue.

For the record, I have no clue about what the answer may be. Originally, I thought the allegation to be bogus, but meanwhile I'm not sure about that. Certainly Pat Symonds in the link ioan posted somewhere above doesn't come across as very convincing with all of his "I don't recall" and "I'd rather not answer that".

sometimes as maclaren have showed in Australia, it is actually the evasive response and non disclosure that becomes more problematic than the actual situation. For my money symonds was doing what any normal human being in his position would do, be evasive, and try and not incriminate himself in a no win situation. his non answers are just that, not admission of guilt, but rather a statement made in a tense situation where he knows any answer he gives to the fIa will be construed however max wants it to be since they already sided with piquet.

[BDunnell]

sometimes as maclaren have showed in Australia, it is actually the evasive response and non disclosure that becomes more problematic than the actual situation.

Exactly right. Such is the way of these things today — those in positions of authority, no matter whether in politics, sport or whatever, are advised not to give anything much away in an effort to manage the media's response to a crisis, yet this is usually deeply counter-productive.

[ioan]

Talking of questions, these come to my mind:

The relationship between Renault (or at least Briatore) and Piquet Jr. was already damaged by Singapore 2008 (Jr. admitts as much in his leaked statement) and Renault must have been aware by that time that Piquet would leave (or be forced to leave) the team before too long. Why give him ammunition by ordering him to crash?

Maybe because Goshn was threatening the team with pulling out of F1 and this was their chance to safeguard their future?

[ioan]

why does it take anyone a while to press charges or report a blackmailing.

Like 2 months? The timing of the legal action makes it clear that it's just a knee jerk reaction to Piquet Jr. spitting the beans to the FIA. It's a try to bully him out of his statement + a try to discredit him, however the WMSC meeting will take place before the legal action will have got to far and it's result will influence the legal actions result.

[truefan72]

Like 2 months? The timing of the legal action makes it clear that it's just a knee jerk reaction to Piquet Jr. spitting the beans to the FIA. It's a try to bully him out of his statement + a try to discredit him, however the WMSC meeting will take place before the legal action will have got to far and it's result will influence the legal actions result.

it is a simple matter of action, reaction and consequence.

what is the point of legal action when you can simply quietly try and end the situation. It is also a game of one-upsmanship; and that is pretty much how the world revolves. people have a dispute, one takes action, the other sues for defamation or whatever.

From your perspective it is damned if they do damned if they don't. If they did not take legal action and simply left their statements to the weight of the FIA proceedings, you would be on here arguing that it was a sign of guilt that they didn't take actual legal action.

From your perspective if they defend themselves they are guilty, of they stay quiet they are guilty.

[Daika]

"I will not be bullied again into making a decision I regret" Piquet is a idiot, I hope he wil grow(up) a backbone. The magnitude of his/Renault action is mindboggling, his defence is just pathetic. I'm young, stupid, not a stable character, afraid of the dark, unsure of the future, undecided about my place in society but the teenage mutant ninja turtles rocks.

[SGWilko]

Turn it on its head.

If PKJnr was asked to crash, why wait till now to say anything.

So, you see, to say why did Flav and Pat wait till now?

Could it be this is all concocted by the PK's?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78532

NPKSnr has form......

Oh dear, oh dear oh dear, oh dear oh dear oh deary dear!

[Daniel]

I have a nasty feeling about this. I fail to see what Piquet has to gain from this..... Would be nice to see Flav banned from F1 though :)

[keysersoze]

In the latest article it was quite revealing that Piquet's comments were about the meeting and the accident, while Flavio's defense is to attack both Piquets.

[ioan]

it is a simple matter of action, reaction and consequence.

Sure it is, but the timing is suspicious if they claim that tey were blackmailed 2 months ago already.
Why didn't they start legal procedings back then?
Maybe they were afraid that some wrong doings will be unearthed and kept hoping that Piquet will not spill the beans?! Looks like that to me.

[ioan]

Turn it on its head.

If PKJnr was asked to crash, why wait till now to say anything.

So, you see, to say why did Flav and Pat wait till now?

Could it be this is all concocted by the PK's?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78532

NPKSnr has form......

Oh dear, oh dear oh dear, oh dear oh dear oh deary dear!

Good one coming from sweaty Flav. So he's been doing business with the Piquet's although he knew that they are such bad people who will hunt him down? How fitting.

[ioan]

"I will not be bullied again into making a decision I regret" Piquet is a idiot, I hope he wil grow(up) a backbone.

Looks to me that he just got a backbone, but I wonder when will Flav and Symonds get one.

[Roamy]

well this is actually a tough deal. If Renault are guilty then I hope they are tossed out for good. However with that being said so far all I have gotten is that a inferior driver gassed the car coming out of a corner.

The possible problem is that money and power think they are immune and can buy their way to any result. On the other hand you have a rich whiny prix that has the money to defend anything as well. This thing stinks whichever direction you turn

[Daniel]

well this is actually a tough deal. If Renault are guilty then I hope they are tossed out for good. However with that being said so far all I have gotten is that a inferior driver gassed the car coming out of a corner.

The possible problem is that money and power think they are immune and can buy their way to any result. On the other hand you have a rich whiny prix that has the money to defend anything as well. This thing stinks whichever direction you turn
You might be right about Piquet but I just don't really see what he's got to gain out of this all tbh. Sure if he could have got money for keeping it quiet but it's gone waaaaaaay past that and he aint gonna make any money out of this. Now of course that's not proof that it went down as he says it did but still.....

[ioan]

well this is actually a tough deal. If Renault are guilty then I hope they are tossed out for good. However with that being said so far all I have gotten is that a inferior driver gassed the car coming out of a corner.

The possible problem is that money and power think they are immune and can buy their way to any result. On the other hand you have a rich whiny prix that has the money to defend anything as well. This thing stinks whichever direction you turn

Good. Now that we documented your hate for the Piquets and their money, what about your love for Alonso and Sweaty Flab?! :p :

[SGWilko]

Sweaty Flab?! :p :

:eek: we once had this morbidly overweight PA at our office........

You've just brought back memories of a nasty niff!! ;)

[BDunnell]

Like 2 months? The timing of the legal action makes it clear that it's just a knee jerk reaction to Piquet Jr. spitting the beans to the FIA. It's a try to bully him out of his statement + a try to discredit him, however the WMSC meeting will take place before the legal action will have got to far and it's result will influence the legal actions result.

How does it make anything 'clear'? We haven't had the evidence presented yet. There is always a multitude of reasons as to why legal actions can be a long time in coming, just as there are for such actions not being brought at all, or being dropped, or whatever.

[ioan]

:eek: we once had this morbidly overweight PA at our office........

You've just brought back memories of a nasty niff!! ;)

Sorry for that. ;)

[BDunnell]

You might be right about Piquet but I just don't really see what he's got to gain out of this all tbh.

Nothing either way. If his allegations are found to be true, no team will ever employ him, because he was a crap driver AND will be viewed with great suspicion. If they aren't, that all still applies, plus he'll be shown to be a liar — not a word to be thrown around lightly.

[leopard]

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.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/8250042.stm
Sorry failed connection. That's only my pov, I can even forget what happened to me yesterday... :)

[Dzeidzei]

I have a nasty feeling about this. I fail to see what Piquet has to gain from this..... Would be nice to see Flav banned from F1 though :)

The only thing that is absolutely sure already is that Piquet jr will never drive in F1 again. Regardsless of what is the truth in all this mess.

Unless senior buys him a team, of course.

Or would you hire him, guys?

[Daniel]

Nothing either way. If his allegations are found to be true, no team will ever employ him, because he was a crap driver AND will be viewed with great suspicion. If they aren't, that all still applies, plus he'll be shown to be a liar — not a word to be thrown around lightly.
Very true, I could see a point to him lying if he was going to get something out of it but it just doesn't add up.

[BDunnell]

Very true, I could see a point to him lying if he was going to get something out of it but it just doesn't add up.

I ought to point out that, at present, my view is very much that it doesn't add up either way.

[Daniel]

True. Let's hope the truth comes out in the wash.

[Somebody]

I'm not a renault fan, but I am a fan of logic and reason. I cannot fathom that Renault,not fighting for a championship, in a terrible year, will all out of a sudden choose to instigate a situation that could easily backfire, and cost them a $100 mil fine, removal from the sport and about 400 jobs to give Alonso a race win at the latter stage of a meaningless seaosn to them, in a situation that could not even gurantee them the victory.
It's very simple - Renault were seriously considering shutting the R-F1 team down if they didn't get some sort of results and quickly. That would take care of the "removal from the sport and about 400 jobs" all by itself, without any regulatory prompting.

Or, as the PDF linked to puts it:


Briatore spoke to the Belgian stewards at length about Piquet’s emotional state — the ‘rogue employee’ defense — though he neglected to mention that he’d created it and repeatedly exacerbated it. What no one seems to have noted is the emotional state of Briatore and Symonds, among others in the team. At the time, there were serious questions about whether Renault president Carlos Ghosn would keep the team alive in 2009, having previously stated that the team had to perform. Both drivers were out of contention for the championship, but Piquet’s intentional crash was decisive in Alonso beating Nick Heidfeld to fifth, and it significantly helped Renault beat Toyota to fourth in the constructors’ championship. That’s motivation, and juries consider motivation

Maybe they thought as some people in this thread do - it was a race towards the end of the season, almost no-one would care, and those that would would keep their mouths shut for fear of driving Renault out of F1. If they truly believed that, they had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Getting the points for a win, and the jump from fifth to fourth in the WCC, meant a hefty chunk of change for the team all by itself, not to mention the marketing possibilities. If proven, that's WCC money defrauded from Toyota for starters, and points money defrauded from the teams that lost out in the shuffle created by the SC. Not to mention the effect on betting - most "match-fixing scandals" have revolved around betting (which often don't revolve around the actual result, but something trivial like the first throw-in). If they altered the result by dishonest or fraudulent means, they're liable to be sued by anyone who lost money betting on that race; never mind the potential criminal charges in Singapore, France (where Renault are based) and England & Wales (where the RF1 team are based).

[alcatrazhack]

Now Briatore indirectly implied that Piquet is gay.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78532
and Barrichello is upset about Briatore exposing Piquet's private life.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78577

[Daniel]

Now Briatore indirectly implied that Piquet is gay.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78532

What a d***head. I hope this turns out to be true so Flav can be banned for life from taking any part in F1.

[Dave B]

Does the phrase "dignified silence" mean nothing to these people? It's like Jordan and Peter Andre constantly popping up on my TV screen and writing endless magazine columns to tell us how they're keeping their thoughts private.

Come to think of it, maybe Jordan and Flavio use the same tanning salon...

[Daniel]

Does the phrase "dignified silence" mean nothing to these people? It's like Jordan and Peter Andre constantly popping up on my TV screen and writing endless magazine columns to tell us how they're keeping their thoughts private.

Come to think of it, maybe Jordan and Flavio use the same tanning salon...
I don't think he understands the meaning of either of those words :p

[ozrevhead]

what a idiot - sure be mad if you think youve been wrong but this is below the belt

wouldnt suprise me if flav has bullied the living daylights out of NPJ from the start

[Knock-on]

The lack of class from Flav is shocking.

I'm not a fan of his but what an mean, spitefull man he seems to be. Hope he gets the push.

[Daniel]

I agree with you Knockie. Horrible man......

[BDunnell]

What a nasty, undignified way to behave. I am all for people being candid with interviewers but there are limits.

[I am evil Homer]

Ha ha like Flav the bed-hopper has a leg to stand on. What a nasty piece of work....the sooner he leaves F1 the better.

[BDunnell]

Ha ha like Flav the bed-hopper has a leg to stand on.

Yes, the idea of him having any moral authority over anyone is laughable.

[Daniel]

Anyone who cheats on Heidi Klum has to be a bit of a fool

[ioan]

Now Briatore indirectly implied that Piquet is gay.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78532

Sweaty Flab is the lowest form of life in the F1 paddock, always been like that. :\
Hope the Piquets sue him for his stupid comments. :D

[Valve Bounce]

Now, if I were the Chief Executive of a racing team, and the #2 driver comes up to me and threatens to frame me for race fixing by telling him to crash so that #1 driver can win, unless I extend his contract for another year, this is what I would do:
1. Inform the Police immediately
2. Inform the FIA as soon as I am finished informing the Police
3. I would fire the driver immediately after I am finished informing the FIA.
4. Ban the driver from any contact with all members of the team.

Not only did Flav keep mum about the whole thing, but when questioned by the FIA, Flav's second in charge Pat Symonds becomes extremely evasive with his replies, refusing to answer any relevant questions.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out who is telling the truth.

As I posted before, it would be interesting whether Flav or Pat Symonds will even turn up in Singapore in two weeks time. The ICAC would have good reason to arrest the two for race fixing.

[ioan]

Anyone who cheats on Heidi Klum has to be a bit of a fool

They probably deserved each other. :\

[Koz]

"Nelsinho used to live with this gentleman: the nature of their relationship is unknown. His father was very worried about the relationship Nelsinho used to have with this 50-year-old man. They used to live together, and his father asked me to intervene.

"I made this gentleman not come to races anymore, and I made Nelsinho move from Oxford to London in a building where I live, in order to keep him under control.

"I was asked to by his father, and now Nelsinho accuses me of having even taken his friends away from him - I don't know what kind of friends these are, but he accuses me of that."

LMAO

[ioan]

As I posted before, it would be interesting whether Flav or Pat Symonds will even turn up in Singapore in two weeks time. The ICAC would have good reason to arrest the two for race fixing.

The WMSC will probably save them on the 21st with a life time ban from F1. :D

[BDunnell]

Hope the Piquets sue him for his stupid comments. :D

Unless they are untrue, there are no grounds for legal action, surely?

[BDunnell]

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out who is telling the truth.

But we haven't heard any of the actual evidence yet. So we have no idea who is telling the truth. It's all very well for us to think one way or the other, but as yet we have no idea whether or not the incident in question took place in the way described. It's like assuming that if a scandalous newspaper story is printed about someone and they don't sue, the subject of the story must have done exactly as reported. Things just don't work like that.

[ioan]

If its not childiish insults on official press releases, its clueless team managers like Flav not thinking before they speak. I can only put it down to too much sun, and an over emotional temperament.

Or an obvious lack of common sense.

[F1boat]

This is one scandal I refuse to follow and from what I read in this thread, I had a good reason. Both Piquets AND Flavio showed their complete lack of class - they disgust me! Especially the gentleman comments, absolutely disgusting!

[Daika]

Who cares what kinds of insults they throw at each other, They (Piquet/Renault) delibrately but a f1-car into the wall!!!! Haven't seen anybody died because they were hurt by a insult, seen plenty die because debris flying around.

[BDunnell]

Who cares what kinds of insults they throw at each other, They (Piquet/Renault) delibrately but a f1-car into the wall!!!!

Evidence?

[Daika]

Evidence?

Piquet drove the car and imply that he crash the car because he has a weak character, not able to resist pressure, afraid to lose his driving seat if he didn't comply with orders. Google up Piquet comments and leaked evidence.

[Valve Bounce]

But we haven't heard any of the actual evidence yet. So we have no idea who is telling the truth. It's all very well for us to think one way or the other, but as yet we have no idea whether or not the incident in question took place in the way described. It's like assuming that if a scandalous newspaper story is printed about someone and they don't sue, the subject of the story must have done exactly as reported. Things just don't work like that.

OK, ioan first posted this a couple of pages ago, and you may have missed it. It is a rather long read and very well worth reading, although it appear does daunting when you first look at the number of pages: http://axisofoversteer.com/blog/documents/Fit%20Of%20PK.pdf

So, try to imagine Rumpole as the person representing the FIA and questioning Pat Symonds, and imagine Charlie Shean as Pat Symonds. Then it becomes a fascinating read, and you'll probably laugh your way through it.

This is not a scandalous newspaper, and in fact, the evidence is clearly set out. I can see that I will have to keep referring to this link for those who have either missed this post (and ioan's original post giving this link) as forum members keep visiting this thread but have missed this report and are unaware of the weight of evidence against Flav and Pat Symonds.

All credit for providing this link must go to our chief forum investigator ioan, who has done a great job finding this.

Enjoy!! :p :

[Valve Bounce]

The WMSC will probably save them on the 21st with a life time ban from F1. :D

The ICAC has a long arm. Just ask Warwick Reid. http://www.ibk-lawyers.com/leadcase/reid.php
The thing is, I don't know whether there are extradition agreements between Singapore and Europe.

[Valve Bounce]

Evidence?

As provided in my post above. Enjoy!! :p :

[CNR]

would like to know how much money was paid out over the alonso win in Singapore

maybe alonso had no idea about the race fixing ?
Would you tell a FIA snitch about your plans

[CNR]

Williams co-owner Patrick Head told reporters on Sunday that a journalist informed him Piquet had confessed about the crash 15 minutes after the Singapore night race.

http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=119296

Briatore Out, Prost Or David Richards In ?

[Valve Bounce]

Rumours have been circulating that Serena Williams will be representing Flavio and Pat during the WMSC hearings. So far, the rumours have not been confirmed. Please stay tuned.

[Knock-on]

I think Flav has to go no matter what the outcome. His behaviour is calssless and tarnishes the Renault brand.

I hope Dave Richards gets another crack in F1.

[Knock-on]

Finally got around to reading ioan's little nugget :up:

Really interesting read there. Now we have some reliable evidence, hopefully we can draw some conclusions and the ones I draw are parallel to the FIA stewards.

1. There was discussion between at least Pat and Jr about a deliberate crash.

2. Flavs reaction to this was not that of a innocent man who knew nothing about the incident but someone that attempted a Blitzkrieg assault on the Piquets to try scare the bejezus out of them rather than investigate exactly what the situation was. Any rational principal would have investigated why Pat admitted he know about a proposed deliberate crash and go from there. Flav does the opposite and instead goes on the attack leading me to suppose that he know exactly the state of affairs.

3. Pat knows he is toast. He answers some questions but avoids incriminating Flav hoping that he can protect him. I think Flav wont be in a position to when the dust settles. The stewards confirm that avoiding answering their questions will lead them to suppose he is guilty to which he replies that he knows it will but he will not lie. Basically he says he's guilty but won't confirm it or what actually happens (protecting Flav?).

4. The crash was indeed deliberate. After Jr starts the wheel spin, he does an involuntary lift (human nature) before jamming his foot down and keeping it there to crash the car. No matter what you think of Jr's driving ability, I don't think anyone here seriously believes he would do this by accident. Hell, not even my Mum thinks the way to correct wheelspin is to jam your foot on full power until you hit a wall.

5. Motive. Renault had nothing to win in this race with Alonso's strategy and they further compromised it by bringing him in 2 laps before they needed to. If this accident didn't happen then Renault would have been nowhere but after it, the Renault team was safe, the sponsors of the Singapore GP (ING) are happy and Renault get a great result all around.

6. The contract. There was no reason whatsoever to resign Jr. He's dog slow and not a F1 driver. Why, why, why, especially after this crash, sign him again :confused:

After examining the evidence, I think the FIA will throw the book at them. I don't think Flav will escape. It would be interesting to get Tamburello's take on this as a Renault fan? I'm not trying to rub salt in but he must be disgusted as I was when it transpired McLaren were guilty of cheating.

[TMorel]

Considering that Patrick Head was aware of this before they'd even started packing up after the race, I'm amazed/impressed/disapointed (keep changing my mind) that it has been kept under wraps for so long.

Regardless of the outcome, I'm pretty sickened with both Flav and Piquet (as much with Flavs attitude and comments after as am with Piquets actions) and incredibly sad that Pat was involved.

I'm pleased that Rubens is coming out and saying Flav was out of line with his comments, starting to like him more and more this season.

[Daniel]

Finally got around to reading ioan's little nugget :up:

Really interesting read there. Now we have some reliable evidence, hopefully we can draw some conclusions and the ones I draw are parallel to the FIA stewards.

1. There was discussion between at least Pat and Jr about a deliberate crash.

2. Flavs reaction to this was not that of a innocent man who knew nothing about the incident but someone that attempted a Blitzkrieg assault on the Piquets to try scare the bejezus out of them rather than investigate exactly what the situation was. Any rational principal would have investigated why Pat admitted he know about a proposed deliberate crash and go from there. Flav does the opposite and instead goes on the attack leading me to suppose that he know exactly the state of affairs.

3. Pat knows he is toast. He answers some questions but avoids incriminating Flav hoping that he can protect him. I think Flav wont be in a position to when the dust settles. The stewards confirm that avoiding answering their questions will lead them to suppose he is guilty to which he replies that he knows it will but he will not lie. Basically he says he's guilty but won't confirm it or what actually happens (protecting Flav?).

4. The crash was indeed deliberate. After Jr starts the wheel spin, he does an involuntary lift (human nature) before jamming his foot down and keeping it there to crash the car. No matter what you think of Jr's driving ability, I don't think anyone here seriously believes he would do this by accident. Hell, not even my Mum thinks the way to correct wheelspin is to jam your foot on full power until you hit a wall.

5. Motive. Renault had nothing to win in this race with Alonso's strategy and they further compromised it by bringing him in 2 laps before they needed to. If this accident didn't happen then Renault would have been nowhere but after it, the Renault team was safe, the sponsors of the Singapore GP (ING) are happy and Renault get a great result all around.

6. The contract. There was no reason whatsoever to resign Jr. He's dog slow and not a F1 driver. Why, why, why, especially after this crash, sign him again :confused:

After examining the evidence, I think the FIA will throw the book at them. I don't think Flav will escape. It would be interesting to get Tamburello's take on this as a Renault fan? I'm not trying to rub salt in but he must be disgusted as I was when it transpired McLaren were guilty of cheating.
IMHO this is surely worse than what McLaren did and although I felt McLaren got off lightly I hope Renault or at least those involved get some sort of ban out of this.

[Knock-on]

IMHO this is surely worse than what McLaren did and although I felt McLaren got off lightly I hope Renault or at least those involved get some sort of ban out of this.

If they get found guilty, I hope that Flav, Pat and Jr never attend another F1 race.

My views on Renault are in the balance. I don't know if they are conducting a personal investigation but if so, and if they accept the evidence as presented, I would like to see them dismissing both of them before the hearing or directly afterwards. If they don't, then they are being complicit and complacement. I don't think the FIA will stand for that.

[CNR]

Considering that Patrick Head was aware of this before they'd even started packing up after the race, I'm amazed/impressed/disapointed (keep changing my mind) that it has been kept under wraps for so long.

Regardless of the outcome, I'm pretty sickened with both Flav and Piquet (as much with Flavs attitude and comments after as am with Piquets actions) and incredibly sad that Pat was involved.

I'm pleased that Rubens is coming out and saying Flav was out of line with his comments, starting to like him more and more this season.

i am not sure if Patrick Head did know about it at the time i think and hope that he only found out this year
a journalist informed him Piquet had confessed about the crash 15 minutes after the Singapore night race.

[TMorel]

i am not sure if Patrick Head did know about it at the time i think and hope that he only found out this year
a journalist informed him Piquet had confessed about the crash 15 minutes after the Singapore night race.

Ahhhh Ok

"He said that he became aware that Piquet may have crashed on purpose when a journalist friend of his told him that Piquet had let him in on the plot, not long after the race. "

Due to the position of the last comma, I read it as "not long after the Singapore night race, a journalist informed Head that Piquet had confessed about the crash being deliberate"
Especially when the next line was "Many in the sport had their suspicions at the time and I was one of them"

Thanks for correcting my mistake - explain how come everyone kept schtum for so long!

[Valve Bounce]

Ahhhh Ok

"He said that he became aware that Piquet may have crashed on purpose when a journalist friend of his told him that Piquet had let him in on the plot, not long after the race. "

Due to the position of the last comma, I read it as "not long after the Singapore night race, a journalist informed Head that Piquet had confessed about the crash being deliberate"
Especially when the next line was "Many in the sport had their suspicions at the time and I was one of them"

Thanks for correcting my mistake - explain how come everyone kept schtum for so long!

Possibly because there was no proof then, and it did sound rather outrageous. It only becomes plausible when Piquet Jr came out with it and the evidence including telemetry was produced.

Also, this is a very serious criminal matter, and no doubt the Singapore police will be very much involved if the team turns up in Singapore in two weeks time. You could say the timing couldn't be any better (or worse).

[Knock-on]

I'm not too sure they will arrest anyone pending the investigation by the FIA. However, it is a valid arguement that as people do bet on F1, especially in the Far East, then fixing the outcome of a race is illegal.

I would love to see the priggish, posturing Peacock banged up for questioning but can't see it somehow :(

BTW, what is that Sig you have there. Last time I checked, Jenson was trying to show Mark the way but he was so far back, he couldn't see the path clearly :D

[Daniel]

I'm not too sure they will arrest anyone pending the investigation by the FIA. However, it is a valid arguement that as people do bet on F1, especially in the Far East, then fixing the outcome of a race is illegal.

I would love to see the priggish, posturing Peacock banged up for questioning but can't see it somehow :(

BTW, what is that Sig you have there. Last time I checked, Jenson was trying to show Mark the way but he was so far back, he couldn't see the path clearly :D
Hey Knockie don't forget how to dream :p I think Flav would do well in a Singaporean prison :D

[Knock-on]

Hey Knockie don't forget how to dream :p I think Flav would do well in a Singaporean prison :D

Take the worst sort of dirty, crooked, venomous lowlife you can think of.

Now, why would the Singaporean Jails want to be polluted with that?

;)

[ioan]

Is it just me or Renault's blackmail related legal action against the Piquets could be taken as a guilt admission for Crashgate?

[BDunnell]

Is it just me or Renault's blackmail related legal action against the Piquets could be taken as a guilt admission for Crashgate?

Not legally — no way.

[BDunnell]

Oh, and many thanks for the re-posting of that document, which I must confess I had missed before. It does indeed make fascinating, and damning, reading.

[donKey jote]

yep, a good read.
So it looks like at the very least Piquet and Symonds are toast :eek:

If proven I hope Renault get kicked out of this year's championship, thus freeing Alonso to replace Fisi at Ferrari :p : :crazy: :laugh:

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[ioan]

If proven I hope Renault get kicked out of this year's championship, thus freeing Alonso to replace Fisi at Ferrari :p : :crazy: :laugh:

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

Too late Ferrari already used up their 4 drivers per year quota.
Unless they can successfully argue that Badoer doesn't qualify as F1 driver. :D

[BDunnell]

What this does make me wonder is exactly how rife 'event' (whether match, race, or whatever)-fixing is in sport. One hears rumours that never make it into the truly public domain, and thinks 'That can't be true', but then something like this comes up, and you realise how simple it can be given the co-operation of a relatively small number of people.

[Valve Bounce]

Take the worst sort of dirty, crooked, venomous lowlife you can think of.

Now, why would the Singaporean Jails want to be polluted with that?

;)

Don't forget - they still have caning in Singapre as punishment as well as jail time. Can you just imagine Flav getting his arse caned as well as a jail term?

[ioan]

Can you just imagine Flav getting his arse caned as well as a jail term?

I'd rather not even try to imagine some of that. :s

[Saint Devote]

There are so holes in this accusation.

Firstly, a JOURNALIST told him - since when does anyone consider that evidence rather than heresay or even worse - a journalist looking to make up a story and seeking leverage?

Secondly, the fuel issue.
If you look back at the Q3 comments of Alonso, he says that he is disappointed at his qualifying position because they thought they could achive a top four grid position - hence the light fuel load.

And it is this point that is being promoted by Nelson Sr now.

The Piquets had better hope that their case rests upon evidence and not heresay otherwise a mountain of hell is going to descend on them powered by Flavio and the French government owned company named Renault.

Either way it will be a great dosappointment to anyone that loves racing. Nobody with this sports interests at heart can wish anyone to be thrown out or whatever.

Nelson jr is irrelevant because he has achieved nothing, but his father and Flavio have achieved a lot.

This issue has been mishandled from the start and ought to have be declared sub-judice and the investigation could have proceeded that way. Ah well....

[Saint Devote]

What this does make me wonder is exactly how rife 'event' (whether match, race, or whatever)-fixing is in sport. One hears rumours that never make it into the truly public domain, and thinks 'That can't be true', but then something like this comes up, and you realise how simple it can be given the co-operation of a relatively small number of people.

Never mind the dark whisperings now spoken of - all the Renault mechanics and others in the team were managed to be kept ignorant of this? I don't think so.

So, everyone kept quiet? For the first time in history nobody talked in the racing paddock? Nonsense.

And given the FOTA problems anyone thinking that Max would have kept quiet?

This whole issue is nonsense and until it has been factually proven I will consider Briatore innicent and the victim of a spoilt Brazilian bitch - Nelson jr.

[Valve Bounce]

Never mind the dark whisperings now spoken of - all the Renault mechanics and others in the team were managed to be kept ignorant of this? I don't think so.

So, everyone kept quiet? For the first time in history nobody talked in the racing paddock? Nonsense.

And given the FOTA problems anyone thinking that Max would have kept quiet?

This whole issue is nonsense and until it has been factually proven I will consider Briatore innicent and the victim of a spoilt Brazilian bitch - Nelson jr.

I refer you to my post #435. The evidence is detailed there in the link provided.

[airshifter]

Either way it will be a great dosappointment to anyone that loves racing. Nobody with this sports interests at heart can wish anyone to be thrown out or whatever.



This is where you are quite obviously wrong. If you had read a lot of forums posters opinions rather than keep repeating your own as the absolute opinion, you might have realized this.

This accusation is no more far fetched than incidents that have happened in recent F1 history, and less wild than those that started with a copier worker within a store.

It is in the best interest of F1 to investigate accusations of race fixing and have the accused defend the accusations against them. It is not in the interest of F1 to sweep it under the carpet in hopes that the public and other teams will forget that an accusation never took place.

[Valve Bounce]

This is where you are quite obviously wrong. If you had read a lot of forums posters opinions rather than keep repeating your own as the absolute opinion, you might have realized this.

This accusation is no more far fetched than incidents that have happened in recent F1 history, and less wild than those that started with a copier worker within a store.

It is in the best interest of F1 to investigate accusations of race fixing and have the accused defend the accusations against them. It is not in the interest of F1 to sweep it under the carpet in hopes that the public and other teams will forget that an accusation never took place.

Very true. I have posted a link at my post # 435, in which is linked the Questioning of a very furtive and evasive Pat Symonds, and the detailing of evidence that the FIA has gathered and put to him to which he is very reluctant to either answer or even make any meaningful comment.

Instructing a driver where and when to crash his car and organising for a refueling strategy to suit the deployment of the safety car so that his team mate can win is nothing short of race fixing. This is an indictable offence, as both Flav and Pat Symonds will find out if they have the courage to so much at turn up anytime in the future in Singapore. They won't have the niceties of British law to protect them if they so much as land at Changi, even on transit to somewherer else.

[CNR]

now if this is true ?
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/sport/formulaone/article_1433567.php/Alonso_wins_Singapore_GP_as_disaster_strikes_Massa

'I cannot believe it right now. I need a couple of days to realise that we won a race this year,' said Alonso.[/*:m:2wrm7roi]
Once the pit lane re-opened both Massa and Hamilton pitted but the Brazilian's stop was a disaster as he pulled away with the fuel nozzle still attached and into the path of Adrian Sutil's Force India car (if there had not been a rush massa may not have pulled away with the fuel nozzle still attached as the race track would not have been compacted behind the safety car and would have had more time ?)[/*:m:2wrm7roi]
Rosberg and Kubica were forced to pit while the pit lane was closed and both picked up a 10-second stop-and-go penalty as a result.
'I was really annoyed I thought 'this is it, this is the end of it',' said Rosberg, whose second-place finish is the best in his career.[/*:m:2wrm7roi]
'Unlucky in qualifying but lucky today,' was how Alonso summed up his weekend.[/*:m:2wrm7roi]

[Valve Bounce]

Either way it will be a great dosappointment to anyone that loves racing. Nobody with this sports interests at heart can wish anyone to be thrown out or whatever.
.

You know, you really need to dismount from your lofty saddle and smell the difference between Roses and Bovine Manure!

[DexDexter]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6834552.ece

Hopefully not a double post? Sounds inconclusive to me.

[Big Ben]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6834552.ece

Hopefully not a double post? Sounds inconclusive to me.

If that's all they have then they have nothing. That shouldn't stop them however.

[ArrowsFA1]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6834552.ece

Symonds has been offered immunity from prosecution by the FIA in return for full disclosure about the alleged scheme to have Piquet crash on purpose.
So that's Piquet and Symonds offered immunity :dozey:

[Roamy]

wow what drama so now they want symonds to rat on flav.
I say no chance in hell

[CNR]

Briatore: “F***ing hell . . . my every f***ing disgrace, f***ing, he’s not a driver.”
so why pick him up for this year ?

[Dave B]

Seems like everybody's being offered immunity except for Mr Briatore.

I can't help thinking that Max's final act as FIA president will be to drum yet another of his enemies out of the sport.

[Daniel]

Seems like everybody's being offered immunity except for Mr Briatore.

I can't help thinking that Max's final act as FIA president will be to drum yet another of his enemies out of the sport.
Yeah but this time he's completely unlikeable :D

[ioan]

Seems like everybody's being offered immunity except for Mr Briatore.

I can't help thinking that Max's final act as FIA president will be to drum yet another of his enemies out of the sport.

Maybe Max thought he should do something useful for the sport.

[Roamy]

Maybe Max thought he should do something useful for the sport.


Yea like "Overdose" would be my first thought!!!!

[ArrowsFA1]

Maybe Max thought he should do something useful for the sport.
I'm no fan of Briatore, but it is not the FIA's role to target individuals that the President doesn't like.

[Knock-on]

Seems like everybody's being offered immunity except for Mr Briatore.

I can't help thinking that Max's final act as FIA president will be to drum yet another of his enemies out of the sport.

I agree with you Dave.

Max has got Flav firmly in his sights.

We know there was a deliberate crash and that it was discussed with at least Pat and Jr.

It is becomming more and more likely that Pat and Jr were not acting independently and my suspicion is that Flav was involved.

However, Pat is taking the fall because if Flav keeps his position, he can still be very beneficial to Flav and have him in his debt.

Problem is, Max has a strong suspicion (because of Pat's statement) that Flav was behind this and ain't gonna be happy having Flav pull one over on him. Max will let the tiddlers get away to nail Flav to the mast.

It's not like Pat and Jr are going to be in high demand around the paddock after this anyway.

[Knock-on]

This is where you are quite obviously wrong. If you had read a lot of forums posters opinions rather than keep repeating your own as the absolute opinion, you might have realized this.

This accusation is no more far fetched than incidents that have happened in recent F1 history, and less wild than those that started with a copier worker within a store.

It is in the best interest of F1 to investigate accusations of race fixing and have the accused defend the accusations against them. It is not in the interest of F1 to sweep it under the carpet in hopes that the public and other teams will forget that an accusation never took place.

:up:

What is F1 if this sort of activity goes on.

It is the clearest form of cheating you can have and if people are happy to allow cheating just so we don't have to punish the wrongdoers then it's the end of F1.

All sports have cheating and that's why the governing body is there to regulate the rules. If they don't then what's the point.

I'm critical of Max and the FIA but on this occassion, they are acting which is right and fair. I'm not too happy in the manner they are attacking this issue but at least they are doing something.

[Knock-on]

I'm no fan of Briatore, but it is not the FIA's role to target individuals that the President doesn't like.

I agree with you to a degree Arrows and think this is one of Max's vendettas.

However, in this instance, the means might justify the ends.

If this dictate came from Flav, and Pat takes the fall for it as looked likely, then the person responsible gets away scott free.

That would be far more damaging IMHO.

[MrJan]

Interesting stuff ain't it? :D Makes the whole Spygate issue look quite trivial when you consider that Renault have been accused of being happy to let their driver smash into the wall. Heavy penalties need to be handed out for this, the problem being that Flav is such a key figure in F1 that both the FIA and Bernie might not be too happy to chuck him out. I wouldn't be surprised if off-track politics sort this issue rather than facts and testimony.

[MrJan]

If that actually happened Henners then it would have been wise for Flav to either out him immediately or drop him in the off season. The only reason that would work in getting him an '09 drive would be if the team could be heavily linked with the crash.

[Daniel]

:up:

What is F1 if this sort of activity goes on.

It is the clearest form of cheating you can have and if people are happy to allow cheating just so we don't have to punish the wrongdoers then it's the end of F1.

All sports have cheating and that's why the governing body is there to regulate the rules. If they don't then what's the point.

I'm critical of Max and the FIA but on this occassion, they are acting which is right and fair. I'm not too happy in the manner they are attacking this issue but at least they are doing something.
Agreed. IF this is all true and it does seem as if it may be then Flav needs to be banned from ever turning up at an F1 circuit.

F1 needs to be seen to be squeaky clean after everything else that's happened.

[Valve Bounce]

The only thing new hear is the suggestion that Pat Symonds has been offered immunity from FIA prosecution. The rest has been clearly outlined by the link originally by the indomitable ioan, and repeated again in my post # 435. The point here is no matter what the WMSC finding is, Flav would be well advised never to fly anywhere near Singapore; not even in transit.

[ArrowsFA1]

If this dictate came from Flav, and Pat takes the fall for it as looked likely, then the person responsible gets away scott free.

That would be far more damaging IMHO.
That assumes Briatore initiated this. Perhaps he did, who knows :crazy: Offering immunity to two of the other principal participants in the alleged "race-fix" suggests publicly that the FIA think he did, and yet the WMSC hasn't met yet. That, IMHO, is the wrong way to go about things regardless of who is (or isn't!) involved.

[Valve Bounce]

:up: Yep..

Heres a theory:
Piquet after consulting with his father about his future comes up with a bargaining tool and approaches Briatore and Symonds before the race. He says "I am willing to crash on lap 14 bla, bla bla for the good of the team".... FB and PS both say "don't be ridiculous this is too risky and we do not want any part of it"..
Race day comes and Piquet does exactly what he proposed much to the disgust of FB and PS (hence the abuse and anger on the radio transcript)
FB :“F***ing hell . . . my every f***ing disgrace, f***ing, he’s not a driver.”
Piquet gets a boll**king and him and his father save this experience for a rainy day... 10 months of planning and thinking pass with his career in doubt, and bang perfect... The FIA are approached..

I'm not a fan of Briatore but this kind of scenario does sound plausable to me, especially if Piquet Snr is involved... I guess we'll find out very soon.. :)

Oh Please !! :rolleyes: kut the krap!! Do you really think Jr has the brains to think all that out? Common!! smell the roses and avoid the bovine manure!!

[Garry Walker]

:up: Yep..

Heres a theory:
Piquet after consulting with his father about his future comes up with a bargaining tool and approaches Briatore and Symonds before the race. He says "I am willing to crash on lap 14 bla, bla bla for the good of the team".... FB and PS both say "don't be ridiculous this is too risky and we do not want any part of it"..
Race day comes and Piquet does exactly what he proposed much to the disgust of FB and PS (hence the abuse and anger on the radio transcript)
FB :“F***ing hell . . . my every f***ing disgrace, f***ing, he’s not a driver.”
Piquet gets a boll**king and him and his father save this experience for a rainy day... 10 months of planning and thinking pass with his career in doubt, and bang perfect... The FIA are approached..

I'm not a fan of Briatore but this kind of scenario does sound plausable to me, especially if Piquet Snr is involved... I guess we'll find out very soon.. :)

Except your theory doesnt go well with the fact that Renault signed Piquet to another contract for 2009 soon afterwards.

Good-bye Flavio

[Knock-on]

That assumes Briatore initiated this. Perhaps he did, who knows :crazy: Offering immunity to two of the other principal participants in the alleged "race-fix" suggests publicly that the FIA think he did, and yet the WMSC hasn't met yet. That, IMHO, is the wrong way to go about things regardless of who is (or isn't!) involved.

I agree with you that offering Pat immunity sends out a message that there is bigger fish to fry. We all know there is only 1 bigger fish that Pat implicated.

However, sometimes, you have to get dirty to catch a rat.

[Valve Bounce]

I agree with you that offering Pat immunity sends out a message that there is bigger fish to fry. We all know there is only 1 bigger fish that Pat implicated.

However, sometimes, you have to get dirty to catch a rat.

You know something? When you read the FIA interview with Pat Symonds (see post #435), I had the feeling all along that Pat Symonds was leading in a certain direction, like: "under the present circumstances, it would be unwise for me to say too much, if anything!!" :p :

[Valve Bounce]

Valve please read all the posts mate :)

I have several times, but I am confused as to where you are going with that particular scenario, as there were no smilies to help. :confused:

[ioan]

:up: Yep..

Heres a theory:
Piquet after consulting with his father about his future comes up with a bargaining tool and approaches Briatore and Symonds before the race. He says "I am willing to crash on lap 14 bla, bla bla for the good of the team".... FB and PS both say "don't be ridiculous this is too risky and we do not want any part of it"..
Race day comes and Piquet does exactly what he proposed much to the disgust of FB and PS (hence the abuse and anger on the radio transcript)
FB :“F***ing hell . . . my every f***ing disgrace, f***ing, he’s not a driver.”
Piquet gets a boll**king and him and his father save this experience for a rainy day... 10 months of planning and thinking pass with his career in doubt, and bang perfect... The FIA are approached..

I'm not a fan of Briatore but this kind of scenario does sound plausable to me, especially if Piquet Snr is involved... I guess we'll find out very soon.. :)

And after all you suppose there has happened neither Briatore nor Symonds did report this premeditated crash from Piquet and on top of it they signed him for another season.
Looks plausible, NOT!

[Big Ben]

And after all you suppose there has happened neither Briatore nor Symonds did report this premeditated crash from Piquet and on top of it they signed him for another season.
Looks plausible, NOT!

I understand you can't stand FB. Me neither. I don't get why you're defending the piquets. I don't understand why they shouldn't be treated the same. They were part of it. They only said something when there was no personal benefit from it. Hypotheticaly speaking... of course... since no real proof has been seen yet.

[Knock-on]

I understand you can't stand FB. Me neither. I don't get why you're defending the piquets. I don't understand why they shouldn't be treated the same. They were part of it. They only said something when there was no personal benefit from it. Hypotheticaly speaking... of course... since no real proof has been seen yet.

There are no winners in this and if proven, and to a degree it has been admitted by the parties, then I hope we never see their sorry faces in F1 again. Not slimey Flav, not the formerly respected PS and certainly not the odious, scheeming, backstabbing Piquets.

[DexDexter]

There are no winners in this and if proven, and to a degree it has been admitted by the parties, then I hope we never see their sorry faces in F1 again. Not slimey Flav, not the formerly respected PS and certainly not the odious, scheeming, backstabbing Piquets.


What kind of proof does the FIA need? The FIA is not a civi court, how are their decisions regulated, do things need to proven as well as in civil court? Can śomeone shed light on the matter.

[Valve Bounce]

There are no winners in this and if proven, and to a degree it has been admitted by the parties, then I hope we never see their sorry faces in F1 again. Not slimey Flav, not the formerly respected PS and certainly not the odious, scheeming, backstabbing Piquets.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo What a thing to say!! What a terrible thing to say! :(

[christophulus]

I agree with you that offering Pat immunity sends out a message that there is bigger fish to fry. We all know there is only 1 bigger fish that Pat implicated.

The FIA might as well come out and say they're pinning it all on Flav. There were three people involved (let's assume there was a conspiracy to crash for the sake of argument) - if two people have immunity then Flav is left with the blame.

Therefore, the only outcomes I can see are either Flav steps down (like Ron Dennis), or the entire team gets kicked out. I don't really see a third way in this.

[Robinho]

i think Max will step down happy if he leaves a legacy of a Ron Dennis and Flavio Briatore-less F1 with 28 car grids

[grantb4]

That assumes Briatore initiated this. Perhaps he did, who knows :crazy: Offering immunity to two of the other principal participants in the alleged "race-fix" suggests publicly that the FIA think he did, and yet the WMSC hasn't met yet. That, IMHO, is the wrong way to go about things regardless of who is (or isn't!) involved.

Clearly Mosley is seeking revenge on Briatore.

[ioan]

Therefore, the only outcomes I can see are either Flav steps down (like Ron Dennis), or the entire team gets kicked out. I don't really see a third way in this.

Renault sack both Briatore and Symonds in order to save face, that's the 3rd option.

[ioan]

Clearly Mosley is seeking revenge on Briatore.

Yep, clear as mud.

[Knock-on]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo What a thing to say!! What a terrible thing to say! :(

You don't agree :?:

[ClarkFan]

Oh Please !! :rolleyes: kut the krap!! Do you really think Jr has the brains to think all that out? Common!! smell the roses and avoid the bovine manure!!
But what about his father? :vader:

One of the key problems with the whole saga is that if you had a matching contest with Flavio and Nelson Sr. as choices on one side and "lying dirtbag" as one of the descriptions, you would feel obliged to connect that description to both of them. :rolleyes:

ClarkFan

[ClarkFan]

wow what drama so now they want symonds to rat on flav.
I say no chance in hell
Unless Symonds wants to sleep with the fishes......

ClarkFan

[ClarkFan]

Seems like everybody's being offered immunity except for Mr Briatore.

I can't help thinking that Max's final act as FIA president will be to drum yet another of his enemies out of the sport.
Well as Max has often said, "After you get a good whipping, there is nothing better than to give a good whipping."

ClarkFan

[tec4]

---
In the stewards' report about that interview, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Symonds confirms that the race-day meeting between himself, Briatore and Piquet did take place.
The stewards reports added: "Mr. Symonds accepted that he had discussed with NPJ (Piquet) the possibility of a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, although he said the suggestion was raised by NPJ."
---

ONLY in F1 does the above admission deserve immunity -- yet another sad day for corporate F1's "ANYTHING for MONEY" policy -- and we of course believe that it is ONLY Renault that SHOULD make such SAD admissions --blame the other guy to make it sound better? better? regardless of who gets blamed for raising such extremely SAD racing attitudes.

[Knock-on]

Unless Symonds wants to sleep with the fishes......

ClarkFan

Wouldn't be the first time Flav has "lost" a close associate in dubious circumstances ;)

[Knock-on]

Well, what do you think. Shall we get Max a pair for his Retirement?

[Valve Bounce]

But what about his father? :vader:

One of the key problems with the whole saga is that if you had a matching contest with Flavio and Nelson Sr. as choices on one side and "lying dirtbag" as one of the descriptions, you would feel obliged to connect that description to both of them. :rolleyes:

ClarkFan

The intricacies of the low fuel load, early pit stop and location and timing of crash, would be well beyond the connivance of 2 X Piquets. Apart from anything else, Jr had to be reminded what lap he was on, for God's sake. :rolleyes:

[Valve Bounce]

Renault sack both Briatore and Symonds in order to save face, that's the 3rd option.

It would be interesting whether Renault would turn up in Singapore. I can see certain parties being arrested on arrival and the cars impounded by the police.

[Somebody]

---
In the stewards' report about that interview, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Symonds confirms that the race-day meeting between himself, Briatore and Piquet did take place.
The stewards reports added: "Mr. Symonds accepted that he had discussed with NPJ (Piquet) the possibility of a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, although he said the suggestion was raised by NPJ."
---

ONLY in F1 does the above admission deserve immunity -- yet another sad day for corporate F1's "ANYTHING for MONEY" policy -- and we of course believe that it is ONLY Renault that SHOULD make such SAD admissions --blame the other guy to make it sound better? better? regardless of who gets blamed for raising such extremely SAD racing attitudes.
Briatore, however, has claimed the meeting didn't happen at all, with Jr suggesting the crash or otherwise.

Repeat:
Jr says the meeting happened, and PS and FB put the idea to him.
PS says the meeting happened, and Jr put the idea to them
FB claims the whole idea is ridiculous and he had nothing to do with it.

None of those accounts is quite like the other, but one sticks out more clearly than the other two - and, even with PS' story, he and Flav automatically become accessories. And PS' interviews in the "Fit of PK" pdf a page or two back strongly, strongly suggest he was shielding Flav.

Ergo, they have a choice - nail PS to the wall, but have the case against Flav go down for lack of evidence, or make PS an offer he can't refuse...

[Valve Bounce]

Ergo, they have a choice - nail PS to the wall, but have the case against Flav go down for lack of evidence, or make PS an offer he can't refuse...

This would make PS a prime candidate for a chained Harry Houdini under water disappearing act. :p :

[BDunnell]

That assumes Briatore initiated this. Perhaps he did, who knows :crazy: Offering immunity to two of the other principal participants in the alleged "race-fix" suggests publicly that the FIA think he did, and yet the WMSC hasn't met yet. That, IMHO, is the wrong way to go about things regardless of who is (or isn't!) involved.

I agree, especially since, when all the evidence from Renault's side comes out, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Symonds could still appear decidedly guilty, yet he would be getting off scot-free (apart from his inevitable lack of future F1 employment, of course). That would be an unsatisfactory outcome for all.

[BDunnell]

This issue has been mishandled from the start and ought to have be declared sub-judice and the investigation could have proceeded that way.

Why? I don't see any grounds for keeping this out of the public domain. What should never have emerged are the remarks made by Briatore about Piquet's private life, which were totally unnecessary whatever the circumstances.

[ArrowsFA1]

James Allen's take on the issue of immunity:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2009/09/the-rights-and-wrongs-of-immunity/

[F1boat]

James Allen's take on the issue of immunity:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2009/09/the-rights-and-wrongs-of-immunity/

Great article...

[F1boat]

Renault will turn up in Singapore because the police have no rights to interfere with an FIA investigation unless the FIA ask for assistance. This may have been an example of cheating within a sport with a governing body, so if the police were to wade in a take action, then the FIA would be obsolete in their presence. It works in the same way that Raikkonen's speeding fine/penalty at Monza was not an issue for the police. This is why F1 has a governing body, and the only way police have an automatic right to be involved, is if a death has occured at a race track.... :)

Thanks for the info...

[Roamy]

Why? I don't see any grounds for keeping this out of the public domain. What should never have emerged are the remarks made by Briatore about Piquet's private life, which were totally unnecessary whatever the circumstances.

Where is the "Gay Pride" Piquet should be joyous this information came out! Oh Flavio you "Brute"

[Daniel]

Renault will turn up in Singapore because the police have no rights to interfere with an FIA investigation unless the FIA ask for assistance. This may have been an example of cheating within a sport with a governing body, so if the police were to wade in a take action, then the FIA would be obsolete in their presence. It works in the same way that Raikkonen's speeding fine/penalty at Monza was not an issue for the police. This is why F1 has a governing body, and the only way police have an automatic right to be involved, is if a death has occured at a race track.... :)
You've got it the wrong way around. Any Singaporean investigation would take priority over an FIA one

[Roamy]

It is pretty easy to give immunity to Piquet because he is as done. So why didn't they give immunity to Flavio and go after Symonds.

Well I agree someone is going to be "Sleeping with the fishes" before this is all done and I really doubt it will be Flavio.

[Daniel]

This whole situation is ugly and reading through the James Allen article it really hits home that the only people who are going to suffer in all of this are the Renault team. Potentially 400 employee's could very well be out of a job because of this, and I hope Piquet and his father considered this before they approached the FIA. Yes Renault may have done something unforgivable in terms of cheating, but they have now played with the lives of the loyal people working for them by even considering such a callous tactic.

I hope Flav, Pat and Nelson are lying awake at night knowing that the people back in Enstone are also losing sleep worrying whether the plug is going to be pulled on their futures. Cheating is one thing, but informing on fellow cheaters is appalling at the highest level IMO... :)
So better that they keep quiet about it? WTF are you smoking?

[Daniel]

I certainly don't suggest they keep quiet about it, where did you get that from? I make it pretty clear that what they may have done is unforgivable and I hope they realise that they have potentially played with 400 peoples futures. Lets get one thing clear, Nelson Piquet has not gone to FIA because he has the best interests of the sport in mind, or his moral conscience has got the better of him. He informed because it a good way of seeking revenge on his former manager and boss. Its a nasty retaliation which he knows is not only going to affect Flav but many others... I say all this without any aggression towards you by the way.. :)
Peoples jobs are nothing compared to cheating. If they were going to be worried about jobs they should have worried before they cheated.

[Daniel]

But why would the Singaporean authorities waste time and the best part of a million pounds plus investigating this, when the sports governing body is in place to do this anyway? I just can't see that happening myself, and if its near impossible to convict someone in an F1 team of corporate manslaughter, then a cheating allegation would just be expensive with no reasonal outcome.. IMO :)
Because countries tend to have their own justice systems and tend to do their own thing?

[ioan]

Renault will turn up in Singapore because the police have no rights to interfere with an FIA investigation ...

Unless the Singapore police start's their own investigation in this race fixing story, which they are 100% entitled to do.

[ioan]

Because countries tend to have their own justice systems and tend to do their own thing?

:up:

[ioan]

It is pretty easy to give immunity to Piquet because he is as done. So why didn't they give immunity to Flavio and go after Symonds.

Well I agree someone is going to be "Sleeping with the fishes" before this is all done and I really doubt it will be Flavio.

Nobody will be sleeping with any fish, you watched to many movies.

[Roamy]

Nobody will be sleeping with any fish, you watched to many movies.

Well I didn't watch "Brokeback Mountain" Must have been a big hit with Piquet!

[Sonic]

Nobody will be sleeping with any fish, you watched to many movies.

Finding Nemo? ;)

[Sonic]

Peoples jobs are nothing compared to cheating. If they were going to be worried about jobs they should have worried before they cheated.

I doubt the general staff knew anything of the plot (assuming its real). I understand your POV but IMO the punishment should be handed to those guilty of something - in this case Flab, Pat, PK jnr and any one else who attended the "meeting".