David Croft on the radio said that the main differences between the 2 events are that.
1. McLaren never admitted guilt but Renault did.
2. The people involved have all walked and thatis wht the harshest penalty has been given to Flav. He can't even manage a driver anymore.
Does it ring true to anyone that only 2 people in the team knew about this though? I just can't see it. At the very least Piquet's chief mechanic must have known, as the instruction would have been relayed via the team radio, although obviously in some kind of code.
I can't beleive that a team can just put it's hands up, apologise and effectively totally escape punishment. If I ever end up in court for anything I'll definately give it a go.
Certainly a move to ensure Renault don't walk away from the sport. I'd be ok with it if it wasn't for the crazy fines Maclaren got for lesser incidents, it strikes me as being personal rather than professional.
The winner in this is Alonso. He should now sue Piquet Snr. to high heaven, considering the remarks he made to the press about how Fernando must have been in on it.
The winner in this is Alonso. He should now sue Piquet Snr. to high heaven, considering the remarks he made to the press about how Fernando must have been in on it.
If I was Alonso I would keep my mouth shut. The last 2 teams he has been with have been caught cheating. I know he is blameless but if you throw enough mud some will stick. He just needs to drive like a demon and keep his head down.
If I was Alonso I would keep my mouth shut. The last 2 teams he has been with have been caught cheating. I know he is blameless but if you throw enough mud some will stick. He just needs to drive like a demon and keep his head down.
Really? You don't think he knew about the plan and was party to it all? He may not have made any decisions but I doubt he didn't know what was going on and he was certainly the beneficiary so therefore is involved. Maybe not the squeaky clean 'wonder boy' everyone thinks. Wasn't he involved in the Spygate thing but given immunity due to offering evidence?
Really? You don't think he knew about the plan and was party to it all? He may not have made any decisions but I doubt he didn't know what was going on and he was certainly the beneficiary so therefore is involved. Maybe not the squeaky clean 'wonder boy' everyone thinks. Wasn't he involved in the Spygate thing but given immunity due to offering evidence?
Exactly. There's no way he didn't know; his whole race strategy was based around it. It also seemed pretty apparent when Ted Kravitz asked him how he would feel about winning a race that was fixed.
But the FIA have cleared him. I know he's not a popular figure but still.
If you listen to the audio transcript where Max explains his possible role, and asks him to explain himself he just says he leaves it to his engineers.
The audio is interesting as although based in Paris, Brits really do rul e F1 and the WMSC.
Well he was interviewed in Spa I think, and they found no evidence to suggest he was in on it. None of the guilty party have as yet fingered him, so unless the unholy trinity do, or Witness X mentions him, I think he quite rightly in the clear.
Well he was interviewed in Spa I think, and they found no evidence to suggest he was in on it. None of the guilty party have as yet fingered him, so unless the unholy trinity do, or Witness X mentions him, I think he quite rightly in the clear.
Comment