Has Jackie Stewart "lost it"

[wmcot]

What is Jackie Stewart saying?

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=32726

He's basically saying that the espionage scandal is keeping investors away by damaging the integrity of F1. His suggestion that F1 not make public their "dirty washing" means that it's OK to invite an investor into F1 because F1 is good at covering up flaws in its "integrity?" Jackie - that's not integrity. Integrity is not covering up your faults! Integrity involves recognizing your faults and taking appropriate, swift action to correct them and insure they don't happen again!

[BDunnell]

I agree with your view, but I don't think this is really what Stewart is saying. Nowhere does he advocate covering the matter up. He is quite right — a speedy resolution is in everyone's interests.

[wmcot]

I agree with your view, but I don't think this is really what Stewart is saying. Nowhere does he advocate covering the matter up. He is quite right — a speedy resolution is in everyone's interests.

Actually he does mention that F1 should not air their "dirty washing" in public which implies that it should be covered up from public view, giving the impression of integrity.

[GP-M3]

I agree with you.

Jackie's always been a bit of a munchin anyway... never much liked him. Now he is saying stuff it, just let these guys get away with it...

I think Jackie should just go away... he's always bringing up himself in any discussion anyway... he's his own best promoter.




Actually he does mention that F1 should not air their "dirty washing" in public which implies that it should be covered up from public view, giving the impression of integrity.

[Caroline]

He's been a great ambassador for the sport and he is entitled to his views just as much as anyone. Perhaps having seen F1 from both the driver's and team owner's perspective he is more qualified than most to comment.
It's strange how I read the article and came away with different view from the first post :mark:

[Mikeall]

Maybe there are far too many people qualified to comment. Maybe that's the solution, less ex F1 drivers and team bosses commenting on the situation to the papers. Maybe by saying this, he makes companies think it should be a problem, because someone with the standing of Jackie Stewart says it could.

[wmcot]

He's been a great ambassador for the sport and he is entitled to his views just as much as anyone. Perhaps having seen F1 from both the driver's and team owner's perspective he is more qualified than most to comment.
It's strange how I read the article and came away with different view from the first post :mark:

True that he has been a great ambassador of F1.

The other view of Sir Jackie's comments is the anti-Ferrari/FIA view - not exactly an unbiased opinion!

[wedge]

What is Jackie Stewart saying?

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=32726

He's basically saying that the espionage scandal is keeping investors away by damaging the integrity of F1. His suggestion that F1 not make public their "dirty washing" means that it's OK to invite an investor into F1 because F1 is good at covering up flaws in its "integrity?" Jackie - that's not integrity. Integrity is not covering up your faults! Integrity involves recognizing your faults and taking appropriate, swift action to correct them and insure they don't happen again!

I think you've mis-interpreted JYS's comments.

IMO, what he's trying to say is that the whole spying scandal affair has got out of hand and risking damaging the sport, bad PR scaring off future investors and what not.

Mark Blundell (surprisingly) had it spot on when he mentioned the whole affair is like rival political parties spin doctoring - you've got McLaren and Ferrari releasing press releases basically bitching each other.

Personally, I've been avoiding this nonsense until the FIA delivers its judgement.

[Valve Bounce]

Actually he does mention that F1 should not air their "dirty washing" in public which implies that it should be covered up from public view, giving the impression of integrity.


I think there is a difference between "not airing dirty linen in public" and "cover up".

The FIA could have taken decisive action very early in the piece and not allow all sorts of rumours to float around for bloody months. Since the FIA is an organisation, they could have heard the evidence and just made their move.

That the whole thing has dragged on ad nauseum with all sorts of crazy rumours added is just asking for trouble.

I guess we'll find out more tomorrow (Thursday).

[Tazio]

I liked Jackie so much more when his only politics was putting a "beat-down" on the track!

[wmcot]

I think there is a difference between "not airing dirty linen in public" and "cover up".

The FIA could have taken decisive action very early in the piece and not allow all sorts of rumours to float around for bloody months. Since the FIA is an organisation, they could have heard the evidence and just made their move.

That the whole thing has dragged on ad nauseum with all sorts of crazy rumours added is just asking for trouble.

I guess we'll find out more tomorrow (Thursday).

Exactly! This whole issue should have been settled at the first meeting of the FIA world council and in public. If F1 is to have any integrity, it must handle problems in a swift, just, and forceful manner in view of the public. Instead, it (the FIA) is acting as if it were a large, muddling, government bureaucracy.

If this is what JYS meant, then I agree. I still think that misdeeds must be publicized and punished swiftly, no matter which team commits them. Honda's fuel tank was a good example of how things should be handled.

It is possible that the FIA (aka Bernie) is using all this just to get headlines and publicity. After all, some are arguing that sponsors are turning away while two new circuits are putting up big money to come into F1!

[555-04Q2]

What is Jackie Stewart saying?

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=32726

He's basically saying that the espionage scandal is keeping investors away by damaging the integrity of F1. His suggestion that F1 not make public their "dirty washing" means that it's OK to invite an investor into F1 because F1 is good at covering up flaws in its "integrity?" Jackie - that's not integrity. Integrity is not covering up your faults! Integrity involves recognizing your faults and taking appropriate, swift action to correct them and insure they don't happen again!

There are too many old timers throwing their 5 cents around the F1 paddock. Their views are too antequated and pure for the modern animal that is F1. They should watch on the telly and keep their false teeth in their mouth.

[ioan]

He's been a great ambassador for the sport and he is entitled to his views just as much as anyone. Perhaps having seen F1 from both the driver's and team owner's perspective he is more qualified than most to comment.

It doesn't mean, however, that he can't be wrong.


It's strange how I read the article and came away with different view from the first post :mark:

That's because everyone is entitled to her/his opinion, like JS.

[ArrowsFA1]

What is Jackie Stewart saying?
Much the same as Luca di Montezemolo (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62275):

"It's an issue that damages Formula One, and the least is said about it the better."
That's after he'd said Ferrari would deserve an "off-track victory" :rolleyes:

[Flat.tyres]

JS makes a lot of good points.

There has always been this "percieved" relationship that benefits Ferrari and seeing as all this shambles started within Ferrari, then they should really get their own house in order. That is not to say that McLaren weren't quite correctly asked to answer a charge which they did.

The witch hunt is pretty obvious at the moment with Max offering anyone a bribe to hand him Rons head on a silver arrows platter. Max bears a grudge like no other man and the only way Ron has dodged him is by being whiter than white. Max don't like that ;)

If there is any "evidence" then lets have it out in the open on Thursday and have an end to this nonsense once and for all. The Ferrari / FIA bandwagon have an opportunity to put up or shut up and lets move on.

[F1boat]

He is a patriot and wants to defend McLaren and Hamilton's interests.

[ArrowsFA1]

He is a patriot and wants to defend McLaren and Hamilton's interests.
Who? Luca? :eek: That's good of him :laugh: :p

[MAX_THRUST]

I don't think Jackie is mad. Business is always covering up what they are doing. I've never had an honest boss in my life, and if I did I would know the company will be in trouble sooner rather than later for being so open.

Jackie is right though and so is Frank Williams, they all see this as damaging and all parties seem to agree that Ferrari have to much say. (and to much to say). If sponsors all bugger off Ferrari won't care because that will make other teams less well off and then Ferrair can dominate again.

What would F1 be without Ferrari???? I have my opion and I think better off without them. There is always scandal, wherever its fleixbale wings, traction control, launch control, fuel tanks and so on. Its pathetic. The whole situation is displeasing to sponsors. Shell sponsor Ferrari, so what if Ferrari wins the championship because the Mercs are kicked out? Shell helped win the F1 championship for Ferrari, No you didn't, the lawyers and private investigators did.

I wouldn't want to be associated with this mess, big business or not.

[veeten]

and all of this is exactly why other engineering-intensive industries make their employees sign legally-binding non-disclosure agreements, to make absolutely sure that specific trade secrets do not find their way into the hands of their competitors, at least within a given time period.

Seems that if Ferrari had taken the foresight to enforce such a document, muchaless have one in place, Stepney wouldn't have made off with what he had and ran down the road to McLaren-Mercedes.

No one's fault but Luca and Jean's for poor legal management.

[Caroline]

That's because everyone is entitled to her/his opinion, like JS.

Opinion or interpretation? My reading of that has not influenced my opinions about the whole affair.