Renault race-fixing at Singapore 2008

[timbo]

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.

[bill shoe]

OK, now the evidence is straightforward, no strong arguments need to be made.

When the FIA launched their suprise interview with Pat Symonds at Belgium he basically refused to answer basic questions or was "unable" to. He was surprised and didn't have time to think about what was the correct or "safe" thing to say relative to what Piquet and Briattore might say.

http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/ ... estioning/

It's looking like the overall result of crashgate will be-

1. FIA formally concludes accident was intentional.
2. Renault (and thus its drivers) disqualified from race.
3. Rosberg will be the winner.
4. Pat Symonds, a high-level Renault employee clearly knew about the plan or at a minimum has no further credibility to deny it. Symonds will be fired by Renault and banned from F1 for a time.
5. Renault will be given large fine and perhaps a one or two race suspension. They may have their 2008 Constructors position reduced or eliminated which would require payback of some money to Bernie. They probably will not be thrown out of F1 entirely due to the only clear evidence being between one driver and a senior manager as opposed to including the principal or the whole team.
6. Renault will have large negative publicity.
7. Honestly, I'm not sure what affect this will have on Renault's long term presence in F1.
8. Piquet will not have any additional difficulty getting driving employment as a result of this. Remember how easy it was for Alonso to get employment at Renault after it became public knowledge that he tried to blackmail McLaren? However, Piquet will continue to have difficulty getting driving employment due to mediocre driving skills.

Pat Symonds did something stupid, but I have a tiny bit of sympathy for him. There was realistically little safety risk, and he was doing it for his team. He has been with this team since the Toleman days of the early 80's!! He made a dumb decision, and I don't have any problem with him getting severe punishment, but I have some sympathy for him.

[WhiteBlue]

For Piquet jr. it will not make a difference if he gets punished by the FIA or will go free like the drivers in Stepneygate. He will never get into an F1 seat again unless he buys it first.

Rubens is very open with his opinion that someone is going for Briatore's head. That is obviously Piquet sn. His kid's life was destroyed and it is more difficult for a father to accept that than for the guy himself. So now Piquet want's revenge from Flabby and it is very likely that he will get it.

Briatore obviously knew about the plan, he did not make a report to the FIA and fire Piquet or Symmonds. This incriminates him as the team principal responsible for the teams actions. Bernie would have to pull a really devious stunt to get Flabby out of this. In the end he probably isn't interested to help considering that FOTA would loose their marketing talent and he would be more likely to squeeze money from race venues without much interference.

[jddh1]

I think if Symmonds cooperates, he will go walking free. I think they want Flav's head for sure. I don't think they want Renault out at all. I think they'll get Flav out, and "forgive" Renault and let Symmonds run the team.
Piquet will also be "forgiven" for cooperating but no one will hire him because of this for a while. I still think he has some talent but he was not in the right environment. He needs for find a small team if he wants to make it back to F1. Or go to Indy.

[Shaddock]

Can anyone see a different outcome other than Renault being banned for next year?

McLaren got a $100 million fine and lost their WC points, but carried on next season.

Can you fine somebody a $100 Million on hearsay evidence?

There is also the telemetry from the car that suggests Piquet had his foot planted against the bulkhead and kept it there, as the cars back end broke away. If he didn't lift and counter steer, then it's pretty much and open and shut case for the FIA.

Who came up with the idea is a different story??????

[Motornic]

There is also the telemetry from the car that suggests Piquet had his foot planted against the bulkhead and kept it there, as the cars back end broke away. If he didn't lift and counter steer, then it's pretty much and open and shut case for the FIA.

If it was open and shut based on telemetry, and if there was a red flag there, then the case would have been over a year ago. They had been looking into the matter for some time and they had access to all the car data since the race.

Can anybody qualified person here look at a telemetry page from a pile of all of his crashes and tell me which one was crashed on purpose?

Hearsay.

[Rob W]

Could you imagine ~~~~ Shumacher being asked (or suggesting) to throw the race??

Well.. Ferrari made a habit out of asking Ruebens to move over to let Michael win. Sure, they didn't ask him to crash but they certainly operated well outside of the spirit of racing. Team order rules were even changes because of it.

And in 1999 when Michael broke his leg and missed a few races, on his return at Malaysia he *gifted* the race to teammate Eddie Irvine who by then had the only chance of Ferrari taking out the title.

[qw56q]

[Ciro Pabón]

...

Piquet will also be "forgiven" for cooperating but no one will hire him because of this for a while. I still think he has some talent but he was not in the right environment. He needs for find a small team if he wants to make it back to F1. Or go to Indy.

... or he can drive Demolition Derby cars. Hey, there you have an idea for a post in the Caption Competition thread.

[SZ]

The evidence is all very much heresay on circumstance until there's proof of a proactive effort on Renault's part - Briatore/Symonds in this instance - if that much can be proven, the FIA has the potential to hand out something very severe.

So far though, there's nothing of the sort, and anything that does get handed down is based on political motivations.

Were the worst case to happen and Renault be proven beyond doubt to have used an intentional accident to race advantage, it'd be very telling if NP didn't also receive a severe penalty from the FIA for bringing to sport into disrepute. If he's already been given indemnity against this, it's very telling as to where the motivations for this are coming from.

Remember, FOTA might be spearheaded by Ferrari/McLaren, but the balance of power as to how convincing it is beyond the two teams expected to be in it is Flavio Briatore...

...Shaddock has a very important point. McLaren was fined severely for very concrete evidence that had profound implications for their performance over an entire season. Unless any political motivations are brought to bear, whatever Renault receives can't be nearly as significant.

More to the point, what's in it for the Piquet's other than settling a grudge? Whoever's advising this kid needs to be replaced with a more competent management team. Whether it's true or otherwise - and there's a whole lot anyone outside the sport will never, ever know about - there was never anything to be gained from his initial press release and now this. Someone needs to sit a potentially talented driver down, get a biscuit tray ready and for the good of his career:

[xpensive]

So far though, there's nothing of the sort, and anything that does get handed down is based on political motivations.

Good analysis SZ, no argument there.

[Shaddock]

There is also the telemetry from the car that suggests Piquet had his foot planted against the bulkhead and kept it there, as the cars back end broke away. If he didn't lift and counter steer, then it's pretty much and open and shut case for the FIA.

If it was open and shut based on telemetry, and if there was a red flag there, then the case would have been over a year ago. They had been looking into the matter for some time and they had access to all the car data since the race.

Can anybody qualified person here look at a telemetry page from a pile of all of his crashes and tell me which one was crashed on purpose?
Hearsay.

Well MS was found guilty in Monaco from telemetry and video evidence. He fervently denied the allegations that he crashed deliberately, but the stewards found against him based on the evidence presented to them.

The difference with this case is that Piquet did not directly benefit from the crash, his team mate did. Without evidence from the driver the telemetry alone isn’t enough to prove the case as there isn’t a ‘solid’ motive for the crash. Now we have a motive, and data from the car to prove the case. Piquet, states that he race engineer was suspicious, looking at the data.

Pat Symonds has come and stated that he was at a meeting with Piquet and Flav where Piquet deliberately crashing his car was discussed. That’s Piquet and Symonds both admitting to a meeting where race fixing was discussed. That’s not really hearsay, that evidence.

What I don’t understand is why Flav would go along with it. He’s Piquet’s manager and team boss, but Piquet isn’t a ‘great driver’, and unless Flav was going to employ Piquet forever at Renault, despite his string of poor results, this was always likely to happen in the aftermath of a termination of his contract.

[vyselegend]

There's something bothering me, about the trial Briatore is setting up against Piquet, in parallel to the FIA investigation.

Let's suppose the FIA deems Renault F1 guilty of the allegated charges based on testimony from the Piquets, and apply a sanction, but then Briatore wins his trial against Piquet, with an official court of Justice proving the Piquets lied (or unvalids any other element against the team)?

Would the FIA be forced to cancel their jugement (and the subconsequent sanctions), since they would have based their verdict on what would then be officialy labeled "unrecievable charges"?

Sorry if I'm not clear, for some reason I have difficulties putting down my thoughts in english today... What I'm trying to know, is if the FIA's decisions can be unvalided retroactively in the case they are deemed unvalid by a court of Justice? (even indirectly -i.e if the trial isn't against the FIA decision, but it's verdict is in opposition to it).

[Fil]

Remember, the FIA is not a criminal or civil court, it is an independent sporting court setup for FIA motorsports. What Briatore/Renault have commenced is a criminal case (involving Police Public prosecution, Judges). For this to occur they have had to go to the police in France with their complaints.

The legal action isn't about whether its true or not, its about how the claims are alleged to have been used illegally as a bargaining chip for monetary gain (Piquet's contract) by the Piquets. => Extortion

The case before the FIA is about whether said claims are truthful or not. If Renault/Flav/Symmonds win this, and the Piquet statement is deemed to be untrue, there may be further possibility for Renault/Flav/Symmonds to then further sue for damages for libel & slander (although this is possible anyway).

[carvetia]

So to summarise, what Piquet is saying is: "I was more useful to Renault when i was in the wall than i was when i was on the track".

I was sympathetic to the guy before; if there was one person i wouldn't want to start my F1 career with it would be Flavio... but now, oh what a strange feeling to be cheering for Mr. Briatore.

If Piquet was ever going to be succesful, he would never have found himself in this position in the first place. I can only conclude that he values the dignity of Symonds and Briatore more than he values his own, as he's clearly willing to make the sacrifice!

I'm not sure Renault should waste their time with this circus any more.

P.S. Big headline on the back of The Times (UK) today: "Piquet: 'I crashed on purpose'" ...just what the sport needs!