FIA Launch Investigation into 'alleged events' at 2008 Singapore GP

G-Money

Renault handed 2 year suspended ban. Briatore banned from any FIA events and Symonds banned from F1 for 5 years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8266090.stm

thegoth

Cant help but feel sorry for Symonds. He seemed like a nice guy.

This was very serious. Someone or some people needed to carry the can. Shame the little Wessel Jun got away with it. Well I suppose he's punishment is that no F1 team will ever touch this border line F1 quality driver again, when he has been shown to throw his toys out of the pram like this. Lots more drivers of similar quality to Piquet to pick from.

His only way back to F1 is if Daddy Wessel buys a team or pays for Juns race seat

EvilMonkey

Pretty much as I expected. :eek:

kaizersoze

Far too lenient. Not even a fine, just pay the investigation.:(
No mention of the money they got for their points position last year either.

Glad Briatore's well tanned mug won't be seen around again though. I guess the drivers he has under his wing will get a handy release from their contracts now.
Sorry for Pat Symonds.

thegoth

Could you imagine the face on Max Mosley when the Wessels, I mean Piquets came to him with this evidience. I'd say he would have erected a solid gold statue for Nelson, never mind give him immunity. Flavio has been on Max Mosleys hit list since 1994, sine Flavio wrote a letter to all teams stating he had no confidence in Max's ability.

Nice going away present for Max !!

Ghost Train

Good to see Symonds and Briatore getting decent bans, bans seem to be weighted appropriately. Surprised competition money from last year wasn't incorporated as part of the fine... race result from the Singapore still stands so? Would have thought it might be removed from Alonsos and the teams win record, with race order second to 8th unchanged

Wonder will this be the end of it or will Symonds/Briatore reveal any more details or will any further legal action follow

smooch71

Ghost Train wrote: »

Good to see Symonds and Briatore getting decent bans, bans seem to be weighted appropriately. Surprised competition money from last year wasn't incorporated as part of the fine... race result from the Singapore still stands so? Would have thought it might be removed from Alonsos and the teams win record, with race order second to 8th unchanged

Wonder will this be the end of it or will Symonds/Briatore reveal any more details or will any further legal action follow

Flavio will get a book out of it at least.

Alonso did nothing wrong so they can't take the win from him. And the any major financial fine would have resulted in Renault pulling out.

thegoth

I'd say they could take the win from him if they wanted. The team cheated in order to Benefit Alonso, and it worked . Alonso won. I'd imagine they would consider this in the same way as running the car under weight or tampering with the engine in some way. I think Alonso should loose that win. Lets be honest. He won it because his team cheated, not because or amazing car engineering or stradegy

Firewalkwithme

thegoth wrote: »

I'd say they could take the win from him if they wanted. The team cheated in order to Benefit Alonso, and it worked . Alonso won. I'd imagine they would consider this in the same way as running the car under weight or tampering with the engine in some way. I think Alonso should loose that win. Lets be honest. He won it because his team cheated, not because or amazing car engineering or stradegy

Since the FIA are convinced that Alonso knew nothing of the plot it would not make much sense for them to take the win away from him but they probably should have taken away the constructors points that he won for the team.

I might have an agenda here though - I don't want to have to edit my post on the Kimi to McLaren thread after putting so much effort in

thegoth

I hear what your saying, but at the same time just because Alonso didnt know about it doesnt mean he should be allowed to benefit from it. If Alonso didnt know his car was under weight and he won, then the FIA found out about it, should he be allowed keep the points ?

Firewalkwithme

thegoth wrote: »

I hear what your saying, but at the same time just because Alonso didnt know about it doesnt mean he should be allowed to benefit from it. If Alonso didnt know his car was under weight and he won, then the FIA found out about it, should he be allowed keep the points ?

If his car was underweight that would be a different matter which would merit his points being deducted since he would have gained a performance advantage but the judgment here was that Alonso personally did nothing wrong so it's hard to justify removing his points.

Having said that, I think that if this had all come out before the end of last season he may well have lost his points due to the effect it had on the championship standings but if they were to do it now the FIA would be creating a mess that I don't believe they have the stomach for cleaning up.

thegoth

Yeah, its only acedmic, but I cant see the logical differenc between Alonso not knowing his team had made his car was say 25kg under weight leading tim him winning, and him not knowing that his team organised his team mate to crash and bring out the safety car to lead to his victory

vectra

thegoth wrote: »

I'd say they could take the win from him if they wanted. The team cheated in order to Benefit Alonso, and it worked . Alonso won. I'd imagine they would consider this in the same way as running the car under weight or tampering with the engine in some way. I think Alonso should loose that win. Lets be honest. He won it because his team cheated, not because or amazing car engineering or stradegy

Or driver skills

thegoth

I was going to say that, but I dont think any driver that ever lived could have made that Renault win in Singapore last year. Dare I say not even the mighty Kimi !!

amacachi

thegoth wrote: »

I was going to say that, but I dont think any driver that ever lived could have made that Renault win in Singapore last year. Dare I say not even the mighty Kimi !!

Well he did set the third fastest lap of the race. And won the following race.

thegoth

Not denying that, but without the safety car, I cant see how he could have won the race from 14th as he had similar pace to Massa and about 1.5 tenths off Kimis pace

Ghost Train

smooch71 wrote: »

And the any major financial fine would have resulted in Renault pulling out.

I don't think anybody wants a team like Renault to go the same way BMW have. I guess thats the problem with having a manufacturer involved with two or three teams and the economic climate. Mclaren were fined 100million and given last place in the championship... had to carry the car numbers 22 & 23 for the year. Really think Renault deserve a similar punishment (without the huge fine if the moneys not there)... should they be awarded more competition money this year than Torro Rosso or Force India? I don't think they should

thegoth

I think they are slight but important differences with the Renault and McLaren case.

What I mean is the renault case seemed to be a very spour of the moment thing, involving just 3 people. Something that was thought of at the track. Happened, and was not spoken about again. In the McLaren case, the CEO, chieft designer, Chairman, test driver, and double world champion were in on it for a long time, to the extent that they were exchanging e mails in order to decide what part of the Ferrari data they should test on their car next

Top Dog

Renault's double world champion Alonso and Red Bull's Mark Webber are both managed by Briatore while McLaren's Heikki Kovalainen also has ties with the Italian.

Wonder how easily these guys will be able to void their contracts with Flavio now?

Also wondering what the FA will make of the whole debacle and his interests in QPR?

kevogy

The website below wrote:

Renault have been disqualified from the FIA Formula One World Championship, with the ban suspended for two years, after the World Motor Sport Council (WMSC) found them guilty on Monday of conspiring to cause a deliberate crash in last year’s Singapore Grand Prix.

Full article

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/9/9953.html

kaizersoze

Already being discussed here.....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055667260

RayM

I feel strangely sorry for Piquet. He took the wrong decision when he agreed to crash the car, but the very second they asked him to cheat, he was in a lose-lose situation.

In an ideal world, he should have said "no" when asked, and then immediately reported the issue to the stewards. Briatore and Symonds would have denied it. With no proof available, Piquet would have been branded a liar and a troublemaker, and his career probably would have been over there and then.

G-Money

I kind of feel like Renault got off lightly. Especially when I think how McLaren got fined 100 million and got kicked out of the championship and all they did was some spying. I think Renault maybe should have got some sort of fine or something on top of their suspended ban.

It's a hard line to walk though as I don't think the FIA needs another team and engine supplier leaving the grid. If they were just a team, then maybe.

It's interesting to see how hard they came down on Briatore. Lifetime ban and any drivers he manages won't be allowed a superlicense.

unkel

So Alonso should not have won the race. Is there talk of taking the points off him? If so, surely the championship should be taken off Hamilton and given to Massa?

RayM wrote: »

I feel strangely sorry for Piquet. He took the wrong decision when he agreed to crash the car, but the very second they asked him to cheat, he was in a lose-lose situation.

In an ideal world, he should have said "no" when asked, and then immediately reported the issue to the stewards. Briatore and Symonds would have denied it. With no proof available, Piquet would have been branded a liar and a troublemaker, and his career probably would have been over there and then.

+1

He's not being prosecuted, but he's in a terrible position. His career is over.

mickdw

unkel wrote: »

So Alonso should not have won the race. Is there talk of taking the points off him? If so, surely the championship should be taken off Hamilton and given to Massa?



+1

He's not being prosecuted, but he's in a terrible position. His career is over.

If he was quick enough, he would get back. As I see it, he was pretty much finished anyway as he was never really on the pace. Team Piquet will employ him regardless though.
Delighted to see flavio ruined. Mosley will retire happy Id say. It is pretty obvious that the whole investigation was targeting flavio though with imunity being offered symonds & piquet.

BaZmO*

unkel wrote: »

So Alonso should not have won the race. Is there talk of taking the points off him? If so, surely the championship should be taken off Hamilton and given to Massa?

Why? Hamilton finished ahead of Massa in the race.

unkel

BaZmO* wrote: »

Why? Hamilton finished ahead of Massa in the race.

At the moment of the crash, Massa was leading the race. The crash screwed things up big style.

Ghost Train

unkel wrote: »

At the moment of the crash, Massa was leading the race. The crash screwed things up big style.

Might have made a differance... might not. Can't really go back and fix the result... Ferrari made a mistake during the pitstop, McLaren didn't, they both had to pit, Ferrari problem was more down to the traffic light system than the timing of the pitstop.

So should Renault being Briatore's employer, appologise to Piquet for the situation he was put in?

BaZmO*

unkel wrote: »

At the moment of the crash, Massa was leading the race. The crash screwed things up big style.

Piquet crashed on the 14th lap though. Still an awful lot of racing to go.

unkel

Agreed there's not really a fair way to change the result. If I were Massa, I'd be extra p1ssed off though, although I suppose he has worse things to worry about at the mo

EvilMonkey

grandmaster wrote: »

I kind of feel like Renault got off lightly. Especially when I think how McLaren got fined 100 million and got kicked out of the championship and all they did was some spying. I think Renault maybe should have got some sort of fine or something on top of their suspended ban.

It's a hard line to walk though as I don't think the FIA needs another team and engine supplier leaving the grid. If they were just a team, then maybe.

It's interesting to see how hard they came down on Briatore. Lifetime ban and any drivers he manages won't be allowed a superlicense.

They did get of lightly but the big difference between the mcLaren spygate case is Renault accepted guilt and dealt with the problem.

McLaren denied that they did anything wrong at first and it took two WMSC meetings for them to come clean, they mislead the WMSC saying they knew nothing, then they admitted guilt in the second hearing after the police investigations found evidence.

Slutmonkey57b

Who's to say that they lied in the first hearing? Max? It is possible (however unlikely) that the initial internal investigation either didn't find evidence of wrongdoing, or didn't dig deep enough.

The Renault verdict proves once again that who you are is more important than what you do. Piquet and Symonds were just as guilty as Flav, but only one was someone who made Max look bad, or openly criticised him. Guess which one got the worst punishment... Just as in McLaren, Alonso was just as guilty as Mike Coughlan, but got away scot free...

thebman

Renault seem to have gotten off early.

And to those saying Piquet shouldn't have gotten immunity because he only wanted revenge, well how do we know that Max didn't contact him first?

Maybe he was offered immunity for information rather than coming forward and asking for immunity in exchange for information for revenge. Maybe this is just Max's revenge and Piquet only got in on it afterwards.

I think Renault are getting off extremely lightly TBH. FIA are clearly afraid of them pulling out which is sad as that makes the whole thing make the entire sport look bad as it hasn't cleaned up after the mess.

Symonds 5 year ban seems light too although I guess its for years of service or some crap. Realistically it just makes it look like the whole thing was to get Briatore which it probably was.

I'm glad he's gone though, yet to hear anyone say otherwise. Hope Max goes too now and maybe we can get some useful people in charge in F1.

Ghost Train

thebman wrote: »

Symonds 5 year ban seems light too although I guess its for years of service or some crap. Realistically it just makes it look like the whole thing was to get Briatore which it probably was.

Did read that Symonds wrote a letter to the FIA for the hearing expressing his regret about what happened

Also interesting story saying somebody else, not named from the renault team came forward with info before the hearing
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6845194.ece

FIA have the hearing details online now
http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/2009/Pages/wmsc_220909_docs.aspx

Ghost Train

This is the Symonds letter (Schumacher gets a mention )

Gentlemen,

Although I am not able to attend the extraordinary meeting of September 21st in person I would Iike, by means of this short Ietter, to make some points about the case in question. As I am no Ionger in touch with the Renault Team it is unknown to me whether they may make similar comments although I intend to send a copy of this Ietter to their representatives.

Firstly it appears to me that in all the statements and external reporting that I have read that a key point is missing and that is the fact that the idea for this incident was entirely conceived by Nelson Piquet Jr. It was he who first approached me with the idea. At the time I naively believed that it was something he wanted to do for the good of the team. I was not aware of the position of his contract negotiations although with the benefit of hindsight I now consider that he believed that his actions would have a favourable effect on these negotiations.

Secondly much has been made of the fact that I employed an unusual strategy for the other car and hence people must have been suspicious or knowledgeable before the event. I would counter this by saying that it was not an unusual strategy but instead a novel strategy. It must be remembered that our other car was fuelled for 14 Iaps (23% of race distance). The only other competitor to stan on the softest tyre refuelled at 15 Iaps albeit having started six places higher on the grid. Throughout my career I have been credited with being the first to employ many of what are now the classic strategies (and indeed have developed much of the methodology used to determine them). We had first seen the effect of extreme degradation of very soft tyres in Canada in 2007 and I am sure everyone will remember the sight of Sato in a Super Aguri driving round the outside of the World Champion in a McLaren as a result of differing tyre performance. I was determined not to repeat this mistake and equally I felt that on a circuit that Iooked difficult to pass on (and of which we had no prior knowledge as it was a new venue) I saw Iittle point in running a Iong strategy. The strategy I employed is no Ionger unusual and indeed we saw an extreme example of it this year in Australia (where the tyre problems were similar) when HamiIton staned from the back row of the grid on the softest tyre and stopped after only 11 Iaps of a 58 Iap race ( 19% of race distance).

Finally, and most importantly, I would Iike to discuss the safety aspect of this incident. On that evening in Singapore Nelson Piquet Jr was entirely in control of his own destiny. Only he was in the car and only he could determine the outcome of events. I obviously did not discuss with him the details of how to manage the incident and I am not pretending that I imagined it would be similar to the incident perpetrated by Michael Schumacher during qualifying in Monaco in 2006 but equally I certainly did not expect him to act in a reckless fashion.

In mitigation I would Iike to acknowledge my role in this incident. I was the one who, when the idea was first suggested to me by Nelson Piquet Jr., should have dismissed it immediately. It is to my eternal regret and shame that I did not do so. I can only say that I did it out of a misguided devotion to my team and not for any personal gain whatsoever. l consider the role l have played in bringing the team to where it is today to be my Iife's work. I started the nucleus of the team 28 years ago with only 19 other people. Today it has grown to an organisation that directly employs over 500 people and supports innumerable Iocal and international businesses. The Iast thing that l ever wanted to do was to jeopardise that team and the many people to whom I had an overwhelming responsibility. In a single action I have destroyed the high reputation I have built up during a 33 year career in motor sport. I am a competitive person who worked in a high pressure environment. This can, at times, cloud one's judgement. I have always tried to be an honest person, a fact I hope you will give me credit for by witness of my statements to the stewards in Belgium. On that night in Singapore Iast year I made a mistake the consequences of which I could never have imagined at the time. For that mistake I can only offer all of you, and all those touched by the action I was involved in, my profound apology.

Pat Symonds

RayM

thebman wrote: »

Symonds 5 year ban seems light too although I guess its for years of service or some crap. Realistically it just makes it look like the whole thing was to get Briatore which it probably was.

He'll be 61 when the ban ends, so it's pretty much as good as a permanent one. He worked for Toleman/Benetton/Renault for 28 years, and will hardly want to start afresh with a new team when he's approaching retirement age. I'm not sure that any of them should have been banned from F1. The whole thing has been blown way out of proportion and was actually no worse than a footballer 'diving' to get a match-winning penalty. What Schumacher did in 1997, or what Senna did in 1990 was a whole lot more dangerous.

thebman

Bernie urges Flav to appeal lifetime ban saying its too harsh and he should only get a 1 year ban.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/6226152/Bernie-Ecclestone-Flavio-Briatores-ban-too-harsh-for-Singapore-GP-crash.html

Ghost Train

thebman wrote: »

Bernie urges Flav to appeal lifetime ban saying its too harsh and he should only get a 1 year ban.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/6226152/Bernie-Ecclestone-Flavio-Briatores-ban-too-harsh-for-Singapore-GP-crash.html

Think he might be trying to get him to appeal instead of dragging the fia into a real court room for a civil trial. Don't see him ever getting it reduced to 1 year, maybe 5 years if things went well but still difficult to see that happening

Slutmonkey57b

Nothing to do with Bernie losing a business partner in QPR, as well as the guy that helps run GP2 of course.

Noooo it's all a travesty of natural justice against poor old Flav.

Hands up who's looking forward to Eddie Jordan this weekend?

kaizersoze

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Hands up who's looking forward to Eddie Jordan this weekend?

He'll be good no doubt.

Better maybe if he took leather-face flav's place on the Renault pitwall.:pac:

amacachi

Only if they give him plenty of time. Too short and he looks mad.

G-Money

Two of Renaults sponsors have pulled out with immediate effect as a result of the race fixing scandal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8273965.stm

Ghost Train

Well I guess since Ing were leaving anyway it not too bad financially, but looks bad for the team. The insurance company pulling out you can hardly blame them with the whole thing resulting from a dodgy car crash... wonder if they do car insurance

Grim.

rofl grosjean just crashed in the same place in fp1 hahaha

Ghost Train

Grim. wrote: »

rofl grosjean just crashed in the same place in fp1 hahaha

yep red flagged session lol

thebman

grandmaster wrote: »

Two of Renaults sponsors have pulled out with immediate effect as a result of the race fixing scandal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8273965.stm

Kind of expected, I doubt insurance companies or investment bankers are doing particularly well in the current financial climate either.

Lol for Ing's investment bankers, a crash raises different images again. Lots of jokes to be made out of this :P

Anyway they were probably just looking for an easy way out and this gave it to them.

EvilMonkey

Renault were losing ING anyway and I would say the other Spanish sponsor realises Alonso is probably going so this is a good excuse to get out of the contract.