Renault race-fixing at Singapore 2008

[timbo]

I hate to go off-topic and bring up this CrashGate/Renault stuff again, but has there been anymore info on who will replace Briatore? I know Prost and Richards have talked to Renault, but anything official yet?

AFAIK nothing.
The whole bunch of things would depend on outcome of WMSC tomorrow. Renault is probably unsure over it's prospects in F1, so why bother announcing anything if they might be disqualified (worst case scenario, but anyway).

[Richard]

I hate to go off-topic and bring up this CrashGate/Renault stuff again

x2 =D>

[ISLAMATRON]

And if I am an unreasonable forum member it is solely for the reason that I am not a Ferrari Fanboy like the majority of those on this board. Any dissenting opinion instantly becomes unreasonable when viewed behind RED tinted glasses.

This is laughable.

You are rather unreasonable because you are clearly an 'anti-fanboy'.

The fact that you would bring ferrari into this discussion is clear evidence of that. Allow me to inform you that Ferrari have absolutely nothing to do with this discussion, other than that they are participants in F1.

I never brought Ferrari into the discussion regarding the renault race fixing, they have absolutely no correlation, I was merely answering SZ's incorrect assumption based on his "statistics".

I'll say it again. If Junior had any damn integrity in his body, we wouldn't be arguing over this. Flav this/Flav that. Doesn't matter. Junior should have had a goddamn spine and not either volunteered to do it, or agreed to it (whichever happened). He's a spineless piece os sh*t and I hope he never gets another ride for the rest of his life. Anyone that would willingly crash a car to bring a full course caution, on an essentially blind corner, deserves a ban from all FIA Formula 1 events for life. Glad to see that Schumacher is gone, figured when he left all the BS he did would go with him. Guess not.

Say it all you want, Flav's role in this does matter, he is as guilty as PK jr and both should be punished, had he not pushed PK to do it it would have never happened.

[SZ]

I never brought Ferrari into the discussion regarding the renault race fixing, they have absolutely no correlation, I was merely answering SZ's incorrect assumption based on his "statistics".

You're so easy to get a rise out of. And so very statistically unreasonable.

I'm so glad that you arrived to clear up my 'incorrect assumption'.
How fortunate we all are here to be in the presence of someone who's always right.

[Conceptual]

I never brought Ferrari into the discussion regarding the renault race fixing, they have absolutely no correlation, I was merely answering SZ's incorrect assumption based on his "statistics".

You're so easy to get a rise out of. And so very statistically unreasonable.

I'm so glad that you arrived to clear up my 'incorrect assumption'.
How fortunate we all are here to be in the presence of someone who's always right.

... Not to mention the savior of all things in F1.

For what it's worth, I'll take your statistics over Islamatrons subjective reality any day. At least I know your numbers are based in reality...

[James]

ZING!

I think most threads can be boiled down to ferrari's fault at somepoint

[nipo]

I am relatively new here but i've read a lot of threads. Mr. Islamatron's posts have always drawn a lot of attention (and criticism). Sometimes I think he's gone over the edge and maybe a thread could be more peaceful without those emotions.

However, this time I'd rather side (partially) with his opinion.

(Silence...)
(Anybody ready to bash me because I said this?)
(mmm... okay, let's carry on)

So far with this crash-gate incident, I see at least the following perspectives:
1. Some look at whether the crash was deliberate, i.e. whether the race-fixing did happen and, if it did, who was responsible for it.
2. Some look at the Piquet's and examine whether it was just revenge taken because NP Jr got sacked. Some also pointed out that he wrecked his own career by pointing the finger at Flav.
3. Some look at the conspiracy theory - who's behind all this? Who's the beneficiary now that it has come to this point (i.e. Flav and Pat leaving Renault)?

And the past several pages were all centered around (1) and (3).
That's where I am surprised to see so much conflict - (1) and (3) are two DIFFERENT perspectives and they don't contradict each other.

I'll explain. Let's assume we can establish that:
- Max took control of how this incident developed and benefitted from it to satisfy his personal desires (perspective 3)
- The race-fixing involved all of NP Jr, Flav and PS (perspective 1)

They could BOTH be true at the same time, right?

My opinion on (3) is that, yes, by the development of the story I'd side with the guys who say they see Max behind all this, pulling the strings against Flav. He used, again, USED, the opportunity to the fullest and steered it in a way such that he got his job done. So the "anybody who cannot see Max behind all this please consider this and that" reminders need not come to me.

But I cannot see why this has anything to do with the logical consideration of whether Flav and PS were involved in the making of the race-fixing. Personally, I think it did happen, and it did involve Flav and PS. All the claims about Flav and PS left because of pressure from Max failed miserably to convince me. To all of you who think the entire ordeal was INVENTED/CREATED (as opposed to USED) by Max, you would be assuming, at least, the following:
A. The crash was either purely an accident, or it was race-fixing in which Flav and PS were not involved, i.e. Renault, Flav and PS are innocent;
B. WMSC is a puppet and is wholly controlled by Max and would vote to his liking, whatever reasonable doubt or evidence there might be;
C. Renault does not care about it's public image, and would gladly let the world know it as a "cheater" (which it is NOT) than to stand up against Max. Same thing with the individuals Flav and Pat;
D. The NPs are intentionally making false claims, in the knowledge that it would probably hurt Renault's, Flav's and PS's reputation. They do so understanding that this might have legal repercussions;
E. There WAS a meeting between Flav, PS and NP Jr and race-fixing was brought up in that meeting (admitted by both NP Jr and PS). Yet the plan was never executed despite NP Jr crashed at the perfect lap at the perfect corner and FA sweetly benefitted from it going up a lot of places.

Islamatron said that Flav and Pat leaving Renault proves that they have a part in the race-fixing. If you think otherwise, you are at least assuming A, B and C, and that's quite hard to believe.

Guys, Max behind this doesn't mean Flav and Pat are not responsible. These are two separate things. Put it this way, Max has always have this type of insider information about many teams and many people in the paddock. This time it is with Flav so he pulled out the file about Renault and used it against him. That doesn't make the information contained in the file any less true.

[Roland Ehnström]

Well said nipo! =D>

[raceman]

way to go nipo

thorough coverage



=D>

[timbo]

Islamatron said that Flav and Pat leaving Renault proves that they have a part in the race-fixing. If you think otherwise, you are at least assuming A, B and C, and that's quite hard to believe.

I don't think this assumption is necessary at least about C. Imagine someone says that your girlfriend is cheating on you and you have some inconclusive (would you say that Piquet's telemetry definitely prove he crashed on purpose?) evidences of that and a testimony from the guy she supposedly slept with.
Even if it is all untrue, would your relationship still be the same as before. Take this to the higher level, consider that somehow your parents knew this. Would they be happy with a prospect of marriage?
Renault's purpose is clearly to steer away from the scandal as a company. It is much easier to separate with a suspected cheater and lay all the guilt on him than to prove him innocent.

Besides A and E contradict themselves. As for B name me a single case there WMSC's decision went against what is needed for Mr.M.

[raceman]

WMSC meeting is in progress.....



I wonder what must be going round the table there right now.

darn, when will we know the verdict??

[nipo]

Islamatron said that Flav and Pat leaving Renault proves that they have a part in the race-fixing. If you think otherwise, you are at least assuming A, B and C, and that's quite hard to believe.

I don't think this assumption is necessary at least about C. Imagine someone says that your girlfriend is cheating on you and you have some inconclusive (would you say that Piquet's telemetry definitely prove he crashed on purpose?) evidences of that and a testimony from the guy she supposedly slept with.
Even if it is all untrue, would your relationship still be the same as before. Take this to the higher level, consider that somehow your parents knew this. Would they be happy with a prospect of marriage?
Renault's purpose is clearly to steer away from the scandal as a company. It is much easier to separate with a suspected cheater and lay all the guilt on him than to prove him innocent.

Besides A and E contradict themselves. As for B name me a single case there WMSC's decision went against what is needed for Mr.M.

Quite a decent analogy. Really made me think again.

I think the main point of argue here is whether Renault is really steering "away" from the scandal by asking/making Flav and Pat go away. In the end they still need to appear before the WMSC, they still would be found guilty (they are not going to dispute) after the hearing and what would the press say?

"Renault F1 cheated in the Singapore 2008 GP"
"Team order revival - Alonso win a result of Piquet sacrifice"

etc.

It's like... OK, so you chose to break up with your girlfriend. You wake up tomorrow and everybody finds out that your girlfriend cheated on you and slept with somebody else. The world still laughs at you.

You might argue Renault considered the odds of fighting this out and winning it against Max. As you pointed out, all we know is a few people testifying and some radio scripts as well as telemetry data - inconclusive evidence. Unless there is something we don't know which is not in favour of Renault, I'd say the odds are against Max IF the Renault Team were innocent (i.e. no race-fixing or NP one-man-orchestrated it).

[Miguel]

Neither Briatore nor Symonds need to appear at the WMSC today, because neither of them currently belong to a F1 team. This alone could explain why both of them no longer work for Renault, other than face-cleaning or satisfying Max.

Alonso must appear in the court (brilliant, let's have a driver 9 timezones away from a night race 4 days before FP1) because he has a superlicense and must abide by FIA rules.

By the way, in many developed countries (not in Spain), when someone with an important rank within the government or an enterprise is involved in a scandal, he resigns whether or not he is innocent.

[timbo]

Unless there is something we don't know which is not in favour of Renault, I'd say the odds are against Max IF the Renault Team were innocent (i.e. no race-fixing or NP one-man-orchestrated it).

I said it before - as evidences are so inconclusive it is equally hard to prove them wrong as to prove them right. Look at my example from the position of your girlfriend - how she's gonna prove she never cheated?
I personally believe that E option is most likely to be closest to what happened. If it is indeed so, how you gonna prove that the plan was never put forward? Moreover I would agree that in case of E Pat, Flav and Nelsinho still ARE guilty, but my problem with the story is how it unfolds.
Here's my questions about it.
If Max and Charlie knew that something was supposedly wrong in Singapore last year, why they never looked at telemetry?
Why Piquet Jr. is granted immunity? More-so, AFAIK he was granted immunity AFTER he wrote the letter to FIA, so what's the point of this immunity?
Why Pat was granted immunity?
Why Flavio wasn't granted immunity?
Leaks of telemetry - the timing, we first seen picture from the single lap and it does look suspicious but when you compare several laps and even how he braked for a previous corner it doesn't look as definitely deliberate crash - but we've seen such info only later.

[nipo]

it is equally hard to prove them wrong as to prove them right...

I personally believe that E option is most likely to be closest to what happened. If it is indeed so, how you gonna prove that the plan was never put forward?

Well I think it is otherwise. If there is any reasonable doubt the advantage goes to the defendant. IF Flav and Pat were innocent, they should be sitting there and wait for the prosecutors to prove them guilty, instead of having to prove themselves innocent. As you stated, because the evidence is so thin, IF Flav and Pat were innocent there couldn't be much conclusive evidence out there to prove them wrong, correct?

my problem with the story is how it unfolds.

That's exactly my point.

Your view was always focused on the perspective of this being a conspiracy orchestrated by Max against Flav. All your why's can be answered by "because this whole thing is being manipulated by Max against Flav". As I explained, this has nothing to do with the incident itself. We can continue down this line and look at the motives and methods used by Max (actually I quite appreciate the ppl here digging out the facts and analyzing how Max could be manipulating everybody, it just shows that Max has gone too far with FIA and F1), but this has got nothing to do with whether Flav is guilty or not.