| RALLYT-WRX | 09-14-2007 11:04 AM |
It's a long read, but here it is.
PART 1
FIA release reasons for McLaren expulsion
Friday 14th September 2007
Play Jenson's SEIKO Challenge
Take part and you could win a superb SEIKO watch. ENTER NOW!
The FIA have released their findings from Thursday's hearing...
FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE L' AUTOMOBILE
World Motor Sport Council Decision
Re: Article 151(c) International Sporting Code - Vodafone McLaren Mercedes
13 September 2007
The World Motor Sport Council ("WMSC") met on 13th September 2007 to consider a charge that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes ("McLaren") had breached Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
1 Background
1.1 Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro ("Ferrari") has submitted that it received information on 24 June 2007 suggesting that unauthorised use may have been made of certain of its confidential information. Ferrari has submitted that it subsequently learned that certain of its confidential information had come into possession of Mr. Michael Coughlan ("Coughlan"), the then Chief
Designer of McLaren.
1.2 On 3 July 2007, in the context of litigation in the High Court of England and Wales ("High Court Proceedings") between Ferrari and Coughlan, a search was undertaken at the private residence of Coughlan under the authority of that Court.
According to the evidence before the WMSC, during that search, a dossier of some 780 pages of confidential information belonging to Ferrari was recovered.
1.3 In light of the results of the search, Ferrari wrote to the FIA late on 3 July 2007 inviting it to consider whether the FIA should launch an investigation into the matter.
1.4 After preliminary investigations, on 12 July 2007 the FIA wrote to McLaren requesting it to appear at an extraordinary meeting of the WMSC in Paris on 26 July 2007 ("the 26 July WMSC meeting"). McLaren was informed that, at the 26 July WMSC meeting, it would be asked to answer the charge that between March and July 2007, in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code, it had unauthorised possession of documents and confidential information belonging to Ferrari. In particular, McLaren was charged with the unauthorised possession of one or more of the following technical documents that could be used for one or more of the following purposes: designing, engineering, building, checking, testing, developing and running a 2007 Ferrari Formula One car, including drawings, lay-out and digital mock-up schemes, technical documents and reports and procedures relating, amongst other things, to weight distribution, aerodynamics, component designs, suspension, gearbox, hydraulic, water, oil and fuel system designs, assembly and building technology designs.
1.5 In response to the charge, McLaren made extensive written submissions in advance of the 26 July WMSC meeting and made detailed oral argument at the meeting itself. McLaren did not dispute that Coughlan had come into possession of Ferrari confidential information but argued, inter alia:
(i) that the Ferrari confidential information in question had not been circulated within McLaren;
(ii) that McLaren had neither used nor benefited from the receipt by Coughlan of the Ferrari confidential information; and
(iii) that the actions of Coughlan in receiving and dealing with the Ferrari confidential information were those of a "rogue employee" for which McLaren should not be held responsible.
1.6 The WMSC considered the arguments and evidence presented by McLaren at the 26 July WMSC meeting and came to the conclusion that McLaren had been in possession of Ferrari confidential information and was therefore in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
1.7 Although a number of unsatisfactory elements were noted during the deliberations, in assessing the gravity of the breach, the WMSC concluded that there was insufficient evidence that the information was used in such a way as to interfere with the running of the FIA Formula One World Championship ("the Championship").
1.8 However, conscious of, inter alia, the fact that several related procedures were ongoing (including, notably, the High Court Proceedings, a criminal investigation in Italy and various internal forensic investigations at McLaren and Ferrari), the WMSC explicitly reserved the right to revisit its conclusions if further information came to light, in particular information showing that Ferrari confidential information had been used by McLaren to the detriment of the Championship.
1.9 The following Decision was therefore reached:
"The WMSC is satisfied that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes was in possession of confidential Ferrari information and is therefore in breach of article 151c of the International Sporting Code. However, there is insufficient evidence that this information was used in such a way as to interfere improperly with the FIA Formula One World Championship. We therefore impose no penalty. But if it is found in the future that the Ferrari information has been used to the detriment of the championship, we reserve the right to invite Vodafone McLaren Mercedes back in front of the WMSC where it will face the possibility of exclusion from not only the 2007 championship but also the 2008 championship.
The WMSC will also invite Mr Stepney and Mr Coughlan to show reason why they should not be banned from international motor sport for a lengthy period and the WMSC has delegated authority to deal with this matter to the legal department of the FIA."
PART 1
FIA release reasons for McLaren expulsion
Friday 14th September 2007
Play Jenson's SEIKO Challenge
Take part and you could win a superb SEIKO watch. ENTER NOW!
The FIA have released their findings from Thursday's hearing...
FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE L' AUTOMOBILE
World Motor Sport Council Decision
Re: Article 151(c) International Sporting Code - Vodafone McLaren Mercedes
13 September 2007
The World Motor Sport Council ("WMSC") met on 13th September 2007 to consider a charge that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes ("McLaren") had breached Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
1 Background
1.1 Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro ("Ferrari") has submitted that it received information on 24 June 2007 suggesting that unauthorised use may have been made of certain of its confidential information. Ferrari has submitted that it subsequently learned that certain of its confidential information had come into possession of Mr. Michael Coughlan ("Coughlan"), the then Chief
Designer of McLaren.
1.2 On 3 July 2007, in the context of litigation in the High Court of England and Wales ("High Court Proceedings") between Ferrari and Coughlan, a search was undertaken at the private residence of Coughlan under the authority of that Court.
According to the evidence before the WMSC, during that search, a dossier of some 780 pages of confidential information belonging to Ferrari was recovered.
1.3 In light of the results of the search, Ferrari wrote to the FIA late on 3 July 2007 inviting it to consider whether the FIA should launch an investigation into the matter.
1.4 After preliminary investigations, on 12 July 2007 the FIA wrote to McLaren requesting it to appear at an extraordinary meeting of the WMSC in Paris on 26 July 2007 ("the 26 July WMSC meeting"). McLaren was informed that, at the 26 July WMSC meeting, it would be asked to answer the charge that between March and July 2007, in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code, it had unauthorised possession of documents and confidential information belonging to Ferrari. In particular, McLaren was charged with the unauthorised possession of one or more of the following technical documents that could be used for one or more of the following purposes: designing, engineering, building, checking, testing, developing and running a 2007 Ferrari Formula One car, including drawings, lay-out and digital mock-up schemes, technical documents and reports and procedures relating, amongst other things, to weight distribution, aerodynamics, component designs, suspension, gearbox, hydraulic, water, oil and fuel system designs, assembly and building technology designs.
1.5 In response to the charge, McLaren made extensive written submissions in advance of the 26 July WMSC meeting and made detailed oral argument at the meeting itself. McLaren did not dispute that Coughlan had come into possession of Ferrari confidential information but argued, inter alia:
(i) that the Ferrari confidential information in question had not been circulated within McLaren;
(ii) that McLaren had neither used nor benefited from the receipt by Coughlan of the Ferrari confidential information; and
(iii) that the actions of Coughlan in receiving and dealing with the Ferrari confidential information were those of a "rogue employee" for which McLaren should not be held responsible.
1.6 The WMSC considered the arguments and evidence presented by McLaren at the 26 July WMSC meeting and came to the conclusion that McLaren had been in possession of Ferrari confidential information and was therefore in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
1.7 Although a number of unsatisfactory elements were noted during the deliberations, in assessing the gravity of the breach, the WMSC concluded that there was insufficient evidence that the information was used in such a way as to interfere with the running of the FIA Formula One World Championship ("the Championship").
1.8 However, conscious of, inter alia, the fact that several related procedures were ongoing (including, notably, the High Court Proceedings, a criminal investigation in Italy and various internal forensic investigations at McLaren and Ferrari), the WMSC explicitly reserved the right to revisit its conclusions if further information came to light, in particular information showing that Ferrari confidential information had been used by McLaren to the detriment of the Championship.
1.9 The following Decision was therefore reached:
"The WMSC is satisfied that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes was in possession of confidential Ferrari information and is therefore in breach of article 151c of the International Sporting Code. However, there is insufficient evidence that this information was used in such a way as to interfere improperly with the FIA Formula One World Championship. We therefore impose no penalty. But if it is found in the future that the Ferrari information has been used to the detriment of the championship, we reserve the right to invite Vodafone McLaren Mercedes back in front of the WMSC where it will face the possibility of exclusion from not only the 2007 championship but also the 2008 championship.
The WMSC will also invite Mr Stepney and Mr Coughlan to show reason why they should not be banned from international motor sport for a lengthy period and the WMSC has delegated authority to deal with this matter to the legal department of the FIA."
| RALLYT-WRX | 09-14-2007 11:05 AM |
Part 2
2 Re-convening of WMSC
2.1 Subsequent to the WMSC Decision of 26 July 2007 (the "26 July Decision"), new evidence came to light which, in the FIA's assessment merited consideration by the WMSC.
2.2 A new meeting of the WMSC was therefore convened for 13 September 2007 ("the 13 September WMSC meeting").
2.3 All relevant parties (including McLaren and Ferrari) were informed of the new meeting and were given copies of the new evidence put before the WMSC (in some limited cases, after redaction of confidential information). McLaren and Ferrari were invited to make written submissions which have been duly received by the WMSC.
2.4 Oral submissions and explanations have also been made on behalf of McLaren and Ferrari and at the 13 September WMSC meeting, the WMSC has put questions to those concerned. Opportunities were also offered and taken up for McLaren and Ferrari to cross-examine each others' witnesses.
2.5 Some of the key elements that the WMSC has considered are set out below. In light of the strong imperative in the interests of the sport to issue a swift ruling, the following does not constitute an exhaustive list of the elements considered nor does it purport to be a summary of all of the evidence put before the WMSC.
3 New Evidence - E-mails between McLaren Drivers 3.1 In the period after the 26 July Decision, the FIA was made aware of a specific allegation that e-mails relevant to the FIA's investigation had been exchanged between certain McLaren drivers.
3.2 The FIA therefore wrote to three McLaren drivers (Mr. Alonso, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. de la Rosa) to establish whether or not this allegation had any basis in fact and requested that they produce copies of any relevant documents, including any electronic communications (howsoever conveyed or stored) which may be relevant to this case and which make reference to Ferrari, Ferrari's employee Nigel Stepney ("Stepney") or any technical or other information coming from or connected with either Ferrari or Stepney.
3.3 The McLaren drivers were reminded of their duty as competitors and Super Licence holders to ensure the fairness and legitimacy of the Formula One World Championship. Given the importance of establishing the facts and that the information might not come out any other way, the FIA offered the assurance that any information made available in response to the letter would not result in any proceedings against the drivers personally under the International Sporting Code or the Formula One Regulations. However, the drivers were notified that if it later came to light that they had withheld any potentially relevant information, serious consequences could follow.
3.4 All three drivers responded. Mr. Hamilton responded that he had no information responsive to the FIA's request. Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa both submitted emails to the FIA which the WMSC finds highly relevant. Subsequently (at McLaren's request) both Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa made written statements to the WMSC verifying that these e-mails were sent and received and offering context and explanations regarding the e-mails.
The e-mails show unequivocally that both Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa received confidential Ferrari information via Coughlan; that both drivers knew that this information was confidential Ferrari information and that both knew that the information was being received by Coughlan from Stepney.
weight distribution
3.5 On 21 March 2007 at 09.57 Mr. de la Rosa wrote to Coughlan in the following terms:
"Hi Mike, do you know the Red Car's Weight Distribution? It would be important for us to know so that we could try it in the simulator. Thanks in advance, Pedro.
p.s. I will be in the simulator tomorrow."
3.6 In his evidence given to the WMSC, Mr. de la Rosa confirmed that Coughlan replied by text message with precise details of Ferrari's weight distribution.
3.7 On 25 March 2007 at 01.43 Mr. de la Rosa sent an e-mail to Fernando Alonso which sets out Ferrari's weight distribution to two decimal places on each of Ferrari's two cars as set up for the Australian Grand Prix.
3.8 Mr. Alonso replied to this e-mail on 25 March 2007 at 12.31 (they were in different time zones). His e-mail includes a section headed "Ferrari" in which he says "its weight distribution surprises me; I don't know either if it's 100% reliable, but at least it draws attention". The e-mail continues with a discussion of how McLaren's weight distribution compares with Ferrari's.
3.9 Mr. de la Rosa replied on 25 March 2007 13.02 stating the following: "All the information from Ferrari is very reliable. It comes from Nigel Stepney, their former chief mechanic - I don't know what post he holds now. He's the same person who told us in Australia that Kimi was stopping in lap 18. He's very friendly with Mike Coughlan, our Chief Designer, and he told him that."
3.10 Mr. de la Rosa's e-mail to Coughlan specifically stated that he wished to receive Ferrari's weight distribution for the purposes of testing it in the simulator the following day ("It would be important for us to know so that we could try it in the simulator"). Mr. de la Rosa explained to the WMSC at the meeting of 13 September 2007 that when Coughlan responded with the precise details in question, he (de la Rosa) decided that the weight distribution was so different to the McLaren car set up that it would not, in fact, be tested in the simulator. Mr de la Rosa says that thereafter he regarded the information as unimportant. It seems highly unlikely to the WMSC that a test driver would take a decision of this sort on his own. It also is not clear why, if Mr. de la Rosa regarded this information as unimportant, he would still convey and discuss it with Mr. Alonso some days later in his e-mail exchange of 25th March. Mr. de la Rosa's evidence also makes clear that there was no reluctance or hesitation about testing the Ferrari information for potential benefit, but only that on this occasion he says that there was a technical reason not to do so.
3.11 McLaren's Chief Engineer Mr. Lowe gave clear evidence that decisions relating to simulator testing would normally involve a number of engineering and other staff (as would running the tests themselves). It seems highly unlikely that decisions about what would be run in the simulator would by taken by a test driver on his own.
flexible wing and aero balance
3.12 In the same e-mail exchange of 25 March 2007, Mr. de la Rosa states that tests had been carried out on a flexible rear wing which Mr. de la Rosa says is "a copy of the system we think Ferrari uses". The Ferrari car's precise aero balance at 250 kph is also identified. While it is conceivable that the former item could have been copied from observation of the Ferrari car, it is clear from the context of the exchange (it being part of the information that Mr. de la Rosa describes as being "very reliable" because it comes from Stepney) that the latter item is confidential to Ferrari and that it was passed to Mr. de la Rosa by Coughlan, who got it from Stepney.
tyre gas
3.13 Mr de la Rosa's e-mail to Mr. Alonso on 25 March 2007 at 01.43 identified a gas that Ferrari uses to inflate its tyres to reduce the internal temperature and blistering. The e-mail concludes with a statement (in relation to the gas) that "we'll have to try it, it's easy!".
3.14 Mr Alonso replied at 12.31 that it is "very important" that McLaren test the gas that Ferrari uses in its tyres as "they have something different from the rest", and "not only this year. there is something else and this may be the key; let's hope we can test it during this test, and that we can make it a priority!".
3.15 Mr. de la Rosa replied on 25 March 2007 13.02 stating the following: I agree 100% that we must test the [tyre gas] thing very soon.
3.16 Although the e-mail exchange between Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa makes clear that they both were enthusiastic about trying the gas apparently used by Ferrari in its tyres, Mr de la Rosa's evidence to the WMSC was that he, on his own, decided to explore with a Bridgestone engineer whether the McLaren team should try this gas. He states that he had no other conversations with any other specialist staff within McLaren. His evidence is that the Bridgestone engineer in question doubted whether the gas would confer an advantage upon McLaren.
According to Mr de la Rosa, without further consultation with anyone else at McLaren, and despite the fact that this had apparently been successfully used at Ferrari, the idea was dropped and no actual attempt was made to test the gas in the tyres used by McLaren.
3.17 It seems unlikely to the WMSC that a test driver would engage in such consultations on his own without discussing it any further with anyone else at the team. It also seems unlikely that a decision on whether to pursue the matter further would be taken by a test driver on his own. Finally, Mr de la Rosa's evidence makes clear that there was no reluctance or hesitation about using the Ferrari information, but only that on this occasion it was concluded that there would be no advantage in doing so.
braking system
3.18 On 12 April 2007 at 12.25 Mr. de la Rosa wrote to Mr. Coughlan and asked " can you explain me as much as you can, Ferrari's braking system with the [reference to detailed technical information]? Are they adjusting from inside the cockpit...?"
3.19 After a number of exchanges about whether a description would be too complicated to articulate by e-mail, Mr. Coughlan replies on 14 April 2007 at 14.40 with a technical description which purports to be a description of the principles underpinning the Ferrari braking system. Ferrari have confirmed that the description given is an accurate (though incomplete) description of the principles of its braking system. Coughlan concludes with a statement that "we are looking at something similar". This latter statement strongly suggests that the McLaren system was being worked on from a position of knowledge of the details of the Ferrari system, which, even if the Ferrari system not being directly copied, must be more advantageous to McLaren than designing a system without such knowledge.
3.20 The e-mail exchange between Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso dated 25 March 2007 at 01.43 also describes some aspects of the McLaren braking system and states that "with the information that we have, we believe Ferrari has a similar system" and goes on to describe highly specific elements of the Ferrari system (which cannot be set out here for confidentiality reasons but which clearly demonstrate knowledge of Ferrari's confidential information). stopping strategy
3.21 As mentioned above, Mr. de la Rosa's e-mail on 25 March 2007 13.02 stated "all the information from Ferrari is very reliable. It comes from Nigel Stepney, their former chief mechanic - I don't know what post he holds now. He's the same person who told us in Australia that Kimi was stopping in lap 18. He's very friendly with Mike Coughlan, our Chief Designer, and he told him that.
3.22 The evidence before the WMSC is that Mr. R�ikk�nen (Kimi) actually stopped at lap 19 at the Australian GP. However, the fact remains that Mr de la Rosa cited this information as a reason to believe that Stepney was a reliable source of information. This strongly suggests that McLaren had at least taken account of this information in determining its own strategy.
3.23 The evidence before the WMSC also demonstrates that Stepney had fed information through Coughlan regarding which lap one or more of the Ferrari drivers would stop at during the Bahrain Grand Prix. McLaren has sought to discredit the significance of this information as it proved in the end to be inaccurate. However, the evidence before the WMSC was that the safety car had been deployed early in the race making it likely that stopping strategies would be adjusted. This deployment of the safety car could not have been known in advance of the race and the fact that the stoppage predictions proved inaccurate does not mean that McLaren had not considered and taken account of the information that had been received in determining its own strategy before the race.
3.24 In any case, as there is no legitimate context in which another teams' stopping strategy would be revealed to McLaren in advance, there is very clear evidence that both drivers knew that they were receiving unauthorised and confidential Ferrari information. To the WMSC's knowledge, no effort was taken to report or stem this flow.
2 Re-convening of WMSC
2.1 Subsequent to the WMSC Decision of 26 July 2007 (the "26 July Decision"), new evidence came to light which, in the FIA's assessment merited consideration by the WMSC.
2.2 A new meeting of the WMSC was therefore convened for 13 September 2007 ("the 13 September WMSC meeting").
2.3 All relevant parties (including McLaren and Ferrari) were informed of the new meeting and were given copies of the new evidence put before the WMSC (in some limited cases, after redaction of confidential information). McLaren and Ferrari were invited to make written submissions which have been duly received by the WMSC.
2.4 Oral submissions and explanations have also been made on behalf of McLaren and Ferrari and at the 13 September WMSC meeting, the WMSC has put questions to those concerned. Opportunities were also offered and taken up for McLaren and Ferrari to cross-examine each others' witnesses.
2.5 Some of the key elements that the WMSC has considered are set out below. In light of the strong imperative in the interests of the sport to issue a swift ruling, the following does not constitute an exhaustive list of the elements considered nor does it purport to be a summary of all of the evidence put before the WMSC.
3 New Evidence - E-mails between McLaren Drivers 3.1 In the period after the 26 July Decision, the FIA was made aware of a specific allegation that e-mails relevant to the FIA's investigation had been exchanged between certain McLaren drivers.
3.2 The FIA therefore wrote to three McLaren drivers (Mr. Alonso, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. de la Rosa) to establish whether or not this allegation had any basis in fact and requested that they produce copies of any relevant documents, including any electronic communications (howsoever conveyed or stored) which may be relevant to this case and which make reference to Ferrari, Ferrari's employee Nigel Stepney ("Stepney") or any technical or other information coming from or connected with either Ferrari or Stepney.
3.3 The McLaren drivers were reminded of their duty as competitors and Super Licence holders to ensure the fairness and legitimacy of the Formula One World Championship. Given the importance of establishing the facts and that the information might not come out any other way, the FIA offered the assurance that any information made available in response to the letter would not result in any proceedings against the drivers personally under the International Sporting Code or the Formula One Regulations. However, the drivers were notified that if it later came to light that they had withheld any potentially relevant information, serious consequences could follow.
3.4 All three drivers responded. Mr. Hamilton responded that he had no information responsive to the FIA's request. Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa both submitted emails to the FIA which the WMSC finds highly relevant. Subsequently (at McLaren's request) both Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa made written statements to the WMSC verifying that these e-mails were sent and received and offering context and explanations regarding the e-mails.
The e-mails show unequivocally that both Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa received confidential Ferrari information via Coughlan; that both drivers knew that this information was confidential Ferrari information and that both knew that the information was being received by Coughlan from Stepney.
weight distribution
3.5 On 21 March 2007 at 09.57 Mr. de la Rosa wrote to Coughlan in the following terms:
"Hi Mike, do you know the Red Car's Weight Distribution? It would be important for us to know so that we could try it in the simulator. Thanks in advance, Pedro.
p.s. I will be in the simulator tomorrow."
3.6 In his evidence given to the WMSC, Mr. de la Rosa confirmed that Coughlan replied by text message with precise details of Ferrari's weight distribution.
3.7 On 25 March 2007 at 01.43 Mr. de la Rosa sent an e-mail to Fernando Alonso which sets out Ferrari's weight distribution to two decimal places on each of Ferrari's two cars as set up for the Australian Grand Prix.
3.8 Mr. Alonso replied to this e-mail on 25 March 2007 at 12.31 (they were in different time zones). His e-mail includes a section headed "Ferrari" in which he says "its weight distribution surprises me; I don't know either if it's 100% reliable, but at least it draws attention". The e-mail continues with a discussion of how McLaren's weight distribution compares with Ferrari's.
3.9 Mr. de la Rosa replied on 25 March 2007 13.02 stating the following: "All the information from Ferrari is very reliable. It comes from Nigel Stepney, their former chief mechanic - I don't know what post he holds now. He's the same person who told us in Australia that Kimi was stopping in lap 18. He's very friendly with Mike Coughlan, our Chief Designer, and he told him that."
3.10 Mr. de la Rosa's e-mail to Coughlan specifically stated that he wished to receive Ferrari's weight distribution for the purposes of testing it in the simulator the following day ("It would be important for us to know so that we could try it in the simulator"). Mr. de la Rosa explained to the WMSC at the meeting of 13 September 2007 that when Coughlan responded with the precise details in question, he (de la Rosa) decided that the weight distribution was so different to the McLaren car set up that it would not, in fact, be tested in the simulator. Mr de la Rosa says that thereafter he regarded the information as unimportant. It seems highly unlikely to the WMSC that a test driver would take a decision of this sort on his own. It also is not clear why, if Mr. de la Rosa regarded this information as unimportant, he would still convey and discuss it with Mr. Alonso some days later in his e-mail exchange of 25th March. Mr. de la Rosa's evidence also makes clear that there was no reluctance or hesitation about testing the Ferrari information for potential benefit, but only that on this occasion he says that there was a technical reason not to do so.
3.11 McLaren's Chief Engineer Mr. Lowe gave clear evidence that decisions relating to simulator testing would normally involve a number of engineering and other staff (as would running the tests themselves). It seems highly unlikely that decisions about what would be run in the simulator would by taken by a test driver on his own.
flexible wing and aero balance
3.12 In the same e-mail exchange of 25 March 2007, Mr. de la Rosa states that tests had been carried out on a flexible rear wing which Mr. de la Rosa says is "a copy of the system we think Ferrari uses". The Ferrari car's precise aero balance at 250 kph is also identified. While it is conceivable that the former item could have been copied from observation of the Ferrari car, it is clear from the context of the exchange (it being part of the information that Mr. de la Rosa describes as being "very reliable" because it comes from Stepney) that the latter item is confidential to Ferrari and that it was passed to Mr. de la Rosa by Coughlan, who got it from Stepney.
tyre gas
3.13 Mr de la Rosa's e-mail to Mr. Alonso on 25 March 2007 at 01.43 identified a gas that Ferrari uses to inflate its tyres to reduce the internal temperature and blistering. The e-mail concludes with a statement (in relation to the gas) that "we'll have to try it, it's easy!".
3.14 Mr Alonso replied at 12.31 that it is "very important" that McLaren test the gas that Ferrari uses in its tyres as "they have something different from the rest", and "not only this year. there is something else and this may be the key; let's hope we can test it during this test, and that we can make it a priority!".
3.15 Mr. de la Rosa replied on 25 March 2007 13.02 stating the following: I agree 100% that we must test the [tyre gas] thing very soon.
3.16 Although the e-mail exchange between Mr. Alonso and Mr. de la Rosa makes clear that they both were enthusiastic about trying the gas apparently used by Ferrari in its tyres, Mr de la Rosa's evidence to the WMSC was that he, on his own, decided to explore with a Bridgestone engineer whether the McLaren team should try this gas. He states that he had no other conversations with any other specialist staff within McLaren. His evidence is that the Bridgestone engineer in question doubted whether the gas would confer an advantage upon McLaren.
According to Mr de la Rosa, without further consultation with anyone else at McLaren, and despite the fact that this had apparently been successfully used at Ferrari, the idea was dropped and no actual attempt was made to test the gas in the tyres used by McLaren.
3.17 It seems unlikely to the WMSC that a test driver would engage in such consultations on his own without discussing it any further with anyone else at the team. It also seems unlikely that a decision on whether to pursue the matter further would be taken by a test driver on his own. Finally, Mr de la Rosa's evidence makes clear that there was no reluctance or hesitation about using the Ferrari information, but only that on this occasion it was concluded that there would be no advantage in doing so.
braking system
3.18 On 12 April 2007 at 12.25 Mr. de la Rosa wrote to Mr. Coughlan and asked " can you explain me as much as you can, Ferrari's braking system with the [reference to detailed technical information]? Are they adjusting from inside the cockpit...?"
3.19 After a number of exchanges about whether a description would be too complicated to articulate by e-mail, Mr. Coughlan replies on 14 April 2007 at 14.40 with a technical description which purports to be a description of the principles underpinning the Ferrari braking system. Ferrari have confirmed that the description given is an accurate (though incomplete) description of the principles of its braking system. Coughlan concludes with a statement that "we are looking at something similar". This latter statement strongly suggests that the McLaren system was being worked on from a position of knowledge of the details of the Ferrari system, which, even if the Ferrari system not being directly copied, must be more advantageous to McLaren than designing a system without such knowledge.
3.20 The e-mail exchange between Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso dated 25 March 2007 at 01.43 also describes some aspects of the McLaren braking system and states that "with the information that we have, we believe Ferrari has a similar system" and goes on to describe highly specific elements of the Ferrari system (which cannot be set out here for confidentiality reasons but which clearly demonstrate knowledge of Ferrari's confidential information). stopping strategy
3.21 As mentioned above, Mr. de la Rosa's e-mail on 25 March 2007 13.02 stated "all the information from Ferrari is very reliable. It comes from Nigel Stepney, their former chief mechanic - I don't know what post he holds now. He's the same person who told us in Australia that Kimi was stopping in lap 18. He's very friendly with Mike Coughlan, our Chief Designer, and he told him that.
3.22 The evidence before the WMSC is that Mr. R�ikk�nen (Kimi) actually stopped at lap 19 at the Australian GP. However, the fact remains that Mr de la Rosa cited this information as a reason to believe that Stepney was a reliable source of information. This strongly suggests that McLaren had at least taken account of this information in determining its own strategy.
3.23 The evidence before the WMSC also demonstrates that Stepney had fed information through Coughlan regarding which lap one or more of the Ferrari drivers would stop at during the Bahrain Grand Prix. McLaren has sought to discredit the significance of this information as it proved in the end to be inaccurate. However, the evidence before the WMSC was that the safety car had been deployed early in the race making it likely that stopping strategies would be adjusted. This deployment of the safety car could not have been known in advance of the race and the fact that the stoppage predictions proved inaccurate does not mean that McLaren had not considered and taken account of the information that had been received in determining its own strategy before the race.
3.24 In any case, as there is no legitimate context in which another teams' stopping strategy would be revealed to McLaren in advance, there is very clear evidence that both drivers knew that they were receiving unauthorised and confidential Ferrari information. To the WMSC's knowledge, no effort was taken to report or stem this flow.
| RALLYT-WRX | 09-14-2007 11:05 AM |
Part 3
4 New Evidence - Communications between Coughlan and Stepney
4.1 The evidence put before the 26 July WMSC meeting indicated that a limited number of contacts had occurred between Coughlan and Stepney. Coughlan's affidavit (submitted in the context of the High Court Proceedings) identified a number of such contacts and described incidents where specific Ferrari confidential information was transferred to him. The WMSC considered these contacts but had no specific evidence of further or other contacts. The focus at the 26 July WMSC meeting was on the circumstances surrounding the transmission of the 780 page Ferrari dossier discovered at Coughlan's home.
4.2 New evidence has come to light which strongly indicates that the transmission of confidential Ferrari information from Stepney to Coughlan was not limited to the 780 page dossier. This evidence demonstrates that a far greater level of communication existed between Coughlan and Stepney than was appreciated at the 26 July WMSC meeting. This evidence was submitted by Ferrari and is deemed credible as it originates from the Italian police and is the result of an official analysis of records of telephone, SMS and e-mail contacts between Coughlan and Stepney. The evidence included the following.
4.3 In its report "Allegato 18", the Italian Police demonstrated that in the period 21 March to 3 July 2007, Coughlan received 23 calls from Stepney's personal mobile phone and made four calls to that phone. In the same period, Coughlan received 124 SMS messages from Stepney and sent 66 SMS messages to Stepney.
4.4 In its report "Allegato 9" the Italian Police have identified logs which show 23 emails passed between Coughlan and Stepney between 1 March and 14 April 2007.
4.5 In its report "Allegato 10" the Italian police have identified a further 98 SMS messages and a further eight telephone calls (on different phones) between Coughlan and Stepney between 11 March and 14 April 2007.
4.6 In total, at least 288 SMS messages and 35 telephone calls appear to have passed between Coughlan and Stepney between 11 March 2007 and 3 July 2007.
4.7 The number of contacts increased considerably during private tests carried out by Ferrari in Malaysia at the end of March 2007 and in the run up to and during the days of the Grands Prix in Australia on 18 March 2007, Malaysia on 8 April 2007, Bahrain on 15 April 2007 and Spain on 13 May 2007.
4.8 The evidence of the Italian police that has been produced also states that Stepney sought technical details from Ferrari's chief mechanic, Mr Uguzzoni, about tests carried out by Ferrari in Malaysia in a way that drew attention within Ferrari at the time.
4.9 In addition, e-mails between McLaren drivers were produced to the 13 September WMSC meeting (see above) stating clearly that Coughlan had received information from Stepney regarding the Ferrari car and had passed this information to others within the McLaren team.
4.10 Neither Ferrari nor McLaren have ever disputed (whether at the 26 July WMSC meeting or since) that confidential Ferrari information was passed from Stepney to Coughlan during the period in question. However, the new evidence regarding the number and timing of the contacts makes it far more likely that there was a systematic flow of Ferrari confidential information to Coughlan leading to the conclusion that the illicit communication of information was very likely not limited to the transmission of the Ferrari dossier discovered at Coughlan's home on 3 July 2007. This conclusion is corroborated in the e-mails exchanged between McLaren's drivers (see above).
4.11 McLaren stated in its submissions for the 13 September WMSC meeting that this new evidence on the number and timing of the communications merely confirmed what was already known: that Coughlan and Stepney were illicitly sharing Ferrari confidential information. It has also been suggested by McLaren that Coughlan and Stepney were acting on their own account and that possibly they were planning to seek new employment together elsewhere.
4.12 Without drawing a definitive conclusion on this point, the WMSC considered that it was difficult to reconcile this version of events with the number and timing of the contacts described above as if Coughlan and Stepney had simply been sharing information to facilitate a plan to search for new employment there would appear to be no particular reason for the contacts to have intensified around the tests and the Grands Prix and no reason for Coughlan to share information with McLaren's drivers. Rather, it appeared more likely that the information being exchanged related to those tests and the Grands Prix.
4.13 Further, in light of Coughlan's role within the McLaren team, it had seemed unlikely to the WMSC at the meeting on 26 July 2007 that Coughlan himself would have been able to make any direct or immediate use (whether personal or within his role at McLaren) of up to date information relating to the Ferrari car at the site of different Grands Prix. However, as detailed above, at the 13 September WMSC meeting, the WMSC heard new evidence to suggest that this was not the case and that Coughlan had, in fact, communicated to at least one McLaren driver statements from Stepney of which lap the Ferrari drivers would stop at during both the Australian Grand Prix and the Bahrain Grand Prix. These communications between Coughlan and at least one of the McLaren drivers coincided exactly in time with some of the most intense period of contact between Coughlan and Stepney described above.
4.14 In the absence of another explanation, in light of the number and timing of the communications between Coughlan and Stepney and the e-mail exchanges between the McLaren drivers (see above), the WMSC regards it as reasonable to infer that Coughlan was in receipt of a flow of confidential Ferrari information from Stepney and that at least some of that information was communicated to others within McLaren (e.g. Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso).
4.15 In sum, the new information on the number and timing of the contacts between Coughlan and Stepney inevitably had an impact on the WMSC's appreciation of the nature of the contacts between Coughlan and Stepney, on its appreciation of the emails between the drivers and on the likelihood of Ferrari confidential information received by Coughlan having an influence on his work with McLaren.
5 Coughlan's Role at McLaren
5.1 McLaren's submission made for and at the 26 July WMSC meeting indicated that Coughlan had a relatively limited managerial role and that it would not be possible for him to propose ideas without having to explain their provenance. In McLaren's submission, this demonstrated that, despite having detailed Ferrari technical information, Coughlan could not have used any of this information to benefit McLaren without a significant number of people at McLaren knowing. McLaren submitted statements from a number of its engineers that those engineers were not aware of changes made to the McLaren car using confidential Ferrari information.
5.2 The submissions made for the 13 September WMSC meeting show that that Coughlan may have had a more active role in the design of the McLaren car than previously appreciated by the WMSC.
5.3 The WMSC does not have evidence that any complete Ferrari design was copied and subsequently wholly incorporated into the McLaren car as a result of Coughlan passing confidential from Stepney to McLaren. However, it is difficult to accept that the secret Ferrari information that was within Coughlan's knowledge never influenced his judgement in the performance of his duties. It is not necessary for McLaren to have copied a complete Ferrari design for it to have benefited from Coughlan's knowledge. For example, the secret Ferrari information cannot but have informed the views Coughlan expressed to others in the McLaren design department, for example regarding which design projects to prioritise or which research to pursue. The advantage gained may have been as subtle as Coughlan being in a position to suggest alternative ways of approaching different design challenges.
6 Evidence of Mr. Neale
6.1 At the 26 July WMSC meeting (and the evidence was repeated at the hearing of 13 September) it was noted that Coughlan had revealed to his superior at McLaren, Mr. Neale, that Stepney had attempted to pass secret Ferrari information to Coughlan. A firewall was set up at the instigation of Mr. Neale to prevent further contacts from Stepney and Coughlan was directed to cease contact with Stepney. Within a matter of weeks thereafter, Coughlan attempted to show some photographs to Mr. Neale which, according to Mr. Neale himself, because of the manner in which they were produced, suggested to Mr. Neale that they should not have been in Coughlan's possession. Rather than establish the facts and take appropriate action as his superior at McLaren, Mr. Neale advised Coughlan to destroy the photographs. Coming as soon as it did after McLaren had been required to install a firewall and had directed this same employee to cease contact with a known source of Ferrari confidential information, the WMSC notes that it is very unsatisfactory that no further action was taken to investigate this matter further and make appropriate disclosures to the FIA as regulator.
4 New Evidence - Communications between Coughlan and Stepney
4.1 The evidence put before the 26 July WMSC meeting indicated that a limited number of contacts had occurred between Coughlan and Stepney. Coughlan's affidavit (submitted in the context of the High Court Proceedings) identified a number of such contacts and described incidents where specific Ferrari confidential information was transferred to him. The WMSC considered these contacts but had no specific evidence of further or other contacts. The focus at the 26 July WMSC meeting was on the circumstances surrounding the transmission of the 780 page Ferrari dossier discovered at Coughlan's home.
4.2 New evidence has come to light which strongly indicates that the transmission of confidential Ferrari information from Stepney to Coughlan was not limited to the 780 page dossier. This evidence demonstrates that a far greater level of communication existed between Coughlan and Stepney than was appreciated at the 26 July WMSC meeting. This evidence was submitted by Ferrari and is deemed credible as it originates from the Italian police and is the result of an official analysis of records of telephone, SMS and e-mail contacts between Coughlan and Stepney. The evidence included the following.
4.3 In its report "Allegato 18", the Italian Police demonstrated that in the period 21 March to 3 July 2007, Coughlan received 23 calls from Stepney's personal mobile phone and made four calls to that phone. In the same period, Coughlan received 124 SMS messages from Stepney and sent 66 SMS messages to Stepney.
4.4 In its report "Allegato 9" the Italian Police have identified logs which show 23 emails passed between Coughlan and Stepney between 1 March and 14 April 2007.
4.5 In its report "Allegato 10" the Italian police have identified a further 98 SMS messages and a further eight telephone calls (on different phones) between Coughlan and Stepney between 11 March and 14 April 2007.
4.6 In total, at least 288 SMS messages and 35 telephone calls appear to have passed between Coughlan and Stepney between 11 March 2007 and 3 July 2007.
4.7 The number of contacts increased considerably during private tests carried out by Ferrari in Malaysia at the end of March 2007 and in the run up to and during the days of the Grands Prix in Australia on 18 March 2007, Malaysia on 8 April 2007, Bahrain on 15 April 2007 and Spain on 13 May 2007.
4.8 The evidence of the Italian police that has been produced also states that Stepney sought technical details from Ferrari's chief mechanic, Mr Uguzzoni, about tests carried out by Ferrari in Malaysia in a way that drew attention within Ferrari at the time.
4.9 In addition, e-mails between McLaren drivers were produced to the 13 September WMSC meeting (see above) stating clearly that Coughlan had received information from Stepney regarding the Ferrari car and had passed this information to others within the McLaren team.
4.10 Neither Ferrari nor McLaren have ever disputed (whether at the 26 July WMSC meeting or since) that confidential Ferrari information was passed from Stepney to Coughlan during the period in question. However, the new evidence regarding the number and timing of the contacts makes it far more likely that there was a systematic flow of Ferrari confidential information to Coughlan leading to the conclusion that the illicit communication of information was very likely not limited to the transmission of the Ferrari dossier discovered at Coughlan's home on 3 July 2007. This conclusion is corroborated in the e-mails exchanged between McLaren's drivers (see above).
4.11 McLaren stated in its submissions for the 13 September WMSC meeting that this new evidence on the number and timing of the communications merely confirmed what was already known: that Coughlan and Stepney were illicitly sharing Ferrari confidential information. It has also been suggested by McLaren that Coughlan and Stepney were acting on their own account and that possibly they were planning to seek new employment together elsewhere.
4.12 Without drawing a definitive conclusion on this point, the WMSC considered that it was difficult to reconcile this version of events with the number and timing of the contacts described above as if Coughlan and Stepney had simply been sharing information to facilitate a plan to search for new employment there would appear to be no particular reason for the contacts to have intensified around the tests and the Grands Prix and no reason for Coughlan to share information with McLaren's drivers. Rather, it appeared more likely that the information being exchanged related to those tests and the Grands Prix.
4.13 Further, in light of Coughlan's role within the McLaren team, it had seemed unlikely to the WMSC at the meeting on 26 July 2007 that Coughlan himself would have been able to make any direct or immediate use (whether personal or within his role at McLaren) of up to date information relating to the Ferrari car at the site of different Grands Prix. However, as detailed above, at the 13 September WMSC meeting, the WMSC heard new evidence to suggest that this was not the case and that Coughlan had, in fact, communicated to at least one McLaren driver statements from Stepney of which lap the Ferrari drivers would stop at during both the Australian Grand Prix and the Bahrain Grand Prix. These communications between Coughlan and at least one of the McLaren drivers coincided exactly in time with some of the most intense period of contact between Coughlan and Stepney described above.
4.14 In the absence of another explanation, in light of the number and timing of the communications between Coughlan and Stepney and the e-mail exchanges between the McLaren drivers (see above), the WMSC regards it as reasonable to infer that Coughlan was in receipt of a flow of confidential Ferrari information from Stepney and that at least some of that information was communicated to others within McLaren (e.g. Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso).
4.15 In sum, the new information on the number and timing of the contacts between Coughlan and Stepney inevitably had an impact on the WMSC's appreciation of the nature of the contacts between Coughlan and Stepney, on its appreciation of the emails between the drivers and on the likelihood of Ferrari confidential information received by Coughlan having an influence on his work with McLaren.
5 Coughlan's Role at McLaren
5.1 McLaren's submission made for and at the 26 July WMSC meeting indicated that Coughlan had a relatively limited managerial role and that it would not be possible for him to propose ideas without having to explain their provenance. In McLaren's submission, this demonstrated that, despite having detailed Ferrari technical information, Coughlan could not have used any of this information to benefit McLaren without a significant number of people at McLaren knowing. McLaren submitted statements from a number of its engineers that those engineers were not aware of changes made to the McLaren car using confidential Ferrari information.
5.2 The submissions made for the 13 September WMSC meeting show that that Coughlan may have had a more active role in the design of the McLaren car than previously appreciated by the WMSC.
5.3 The WMSC does not have evidence that any complete Ferrari design was copied and subsequently wholly incorporated into the McLaren car as a result of Coughlan passing confidential from Stepney to McLaren. However, it is difficult to accept that the secret Ferrari information that was within Coughlan's knowledge never influenced his judgement in the performance of his duties. It is not necessary for McLaren to have copied a complete Ferrari design for it to have benefited from Coughlan's knowledge. For example, the secret Ferrari information cannot but have informed the views Coughlan expressed to others in the McLaren design department, for example regarding which design projects to prioritise or which research to pursue. The advantage gained may have been as subtle as Coughlan being in a position to suggest alternative ways of approaching different design challenges.
6 Evidence of Mr. Neale
6.1 At the 26 July WMSC meeting (and the evidence was repeated at the hearing of 13 September) it was noted that Coughlan had revealed to his superior at McLaren, Mr. Neale, that Stepney had attempted to pass secret Ferrari information to Coughlan. A firewall was set up at the instigation of Mr. Neale to prevent further contacts from Stepney and Coughlan was directed to cease contact with Stepney. Within a matter of weeks thereafter, Coughlan attempted to show some photographs to Mr. Neale which, according to Mr. Neale himself, because of the manner in which they were produced, suggested to Mr. Neale that they should not have been in Coughlan's possession. Rather than establish the facts and take appropriate action as his superior at McLaren, Mr. Neale advised Coughlan to destroy the photographs. Coming as soon as it did after McLaren had been required to install a firewall and had directed this same employee to cease contact with a known source of Ferrari confidential information, the WMSC notes that it is very unsatisfactory that no further action was taken to investigate this matter further and make appropriate disclosures to the FIA as regulator.
| RALLYT-WRX | 09-14-2007 11:06 AM |
Part 4 (Final Chapter)
7 Nature of the information held by McLaren
7.1 The WMSC believes that the nature of the information illicitly held by McLaren was information of a nature which, if used or in any way taken into account, could confer a significant sporting advantage upon McLaren.
7.2 Evidence was submitted at the 13 September WMSC meeting by McLaren's Engineering Director, Mr. Lowe, that the dossier of Ferrari information found in Coughlan's possession did not contain information of particular use or interest to McLaren on the basis that the McLaren car was significantly different to the Ferrari car. This submission was apparently made on the basis of the review of the index to the dossier of Ferrari documents (Mr. Lowe having stated that he had not seen the dossier itself).
7.3 The WMSC does not accept this account. In both WMSC hearings and in written submissions, and from the direct knowledge of the WMSC Members, Formula One teams have great interest in each others' technology and go to considerable lengths (within the rules) to study each other's designs and innovations through direct observation, photographic evidence and othermeans. In addition the technical information in Coughlan's possession was, in the WMSC's appreciation, highly significant and could certainly confer a sporting advantage, if used or taken into account.
8 WMSC's Assessment
8.1 The WMSC has carefully considered the evidence and submissions of all parties.
8.2 It has concluded (and intends to re-affirm) that a breach of Article 151(c) has occurred.
8.3 In the 26 July Decision, the WMSC found a breach of Article 151(c). In assessing the gravity of that breach, it took account of a number of factors including any evidence (or, at the time, lack of it) to suggest that the Ferrari information improperly held had actually been used and actually conferred a sporting advantage. Other factors that it took into account included the argument that there was little evidence of the information in question being disseminated to others at McLaren, what the WMSC then understood to be Coughlan's more limited role and the argument that Coughlan was a single rogue employee.
8.4 McLaren has made detailed submissions indicating that none of the information received enhanced the McLaren car. McLaren has suggested to the WMSC that unless "actual use" and a demonstrated and itemised performance advantage can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e. to a criminal law standard of proof), the WMSC is not permitted at law to impose a penalty.
8.5 The WMSC rejects this suggestion. The WMSC has full jurisdiction to apply Article 151(c) and stresses that it is not necessary for it to demonstrate that any confidential Ferrari information was directly copied by McLaren or put to direct use in the McLaren car to justify a finding that Article 151(c) was breached and/or that a penalty is merited. Nor does the WMSC need to show that any information improperly held led to any specifically identified sporting advantage, or indeed any advantage at all. Rather, the WMSC is entitled to treat possession of another team's information as an offence meriting a penalty on its own if it so chooses.
8.6 The fact that in its 26 July Decision, based on more limited evidence, the Council had a different appreciation of the gravity of McLaren's breach does not lead to the creation of a legal test regarding the WMSC's burden of proof.
The WMSC could have imposed a penalty with the 26 July Decision based on the evidence therein, but chose not to (based in part on McLaren's submissions that there had been no dissemination of Ferrari information beyond Mr Coughlan).
8.7 The WMSC has taken note of McLaren's position that an injustice would occur if a penalty were imposed without the FIA having accepted McLaren's offer to inspect the McLaren premises and designs for evidence of Ferrari technology having been copied. However, as noted above, neither the finding of a breach nor the imposition of a penalty require evidence of McLaren having directly incorporated Ferrari technology. Nonetheless, the WMSC have noted and taken account of the open and co-operative nature of this offer and taken this into account in reaching this Decision.
8.8 In light of the evidence now before it, the WMSC does not accept that the only actions of McLaren deserving censure were those of Coughlan. While this situation might have originated with the actions of a single rogue McLaren
employee acting on his own and without McLaren's knowledge or consent, evidence is now available which, when taken in its full context, makes clear that:
- Coughlan had more information than previously appreciated and was receiving information in a systematic manner over a period of months;
- the information has been disseminated, at least to some degree (e.g. to Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso), within the McLaren team;
- the information being disseminated within the McLaren team included not only highly sensitive technical information but also secret information regarding Ferrari's sporting strategy;
- Mr de la Rosa, in the performance of his functions at McLaren, requested and received secret Ferrari information from a source which he knew to be illegitimate and expressly stated that the purpose of his request was to run tests in the simulator;
- the secret information in question was shared with Mr. Alonso;
- there was a clear intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing. If this was not in fact carried into effect it was only because there were technical reasons not to do so;
- Coughlan's role within McLaren (as now understood by the WMSC) put him in a position in which his knowledge of the secret Ferrari information would have influenced him in the performance of his duties.
8.9 It seems to the WMSC clear that Coughlan's actions were intended by him to give McLaren a sporting advantage. He fed information about Ferrari's stopping strategy, braking system, weight distribution and other matters to McLaren's test driver. Furthermore, in light of Coughlan's undoubted experience, he is likely to have known a great deal about how to confer an advantage and the roles of different personnel within the team. It seems most unlikely that he confined his activities to sharing Ferrari's information with Mr. de la Rosa. It also seems most unlikely that his own work was not influenced in some way by the knowledge regarding the Ferrari car that he is known to have possessed.
8.10 Furthermore, it seems entirely unlikely to the WMSC that any Formula One driver would bear the sole responsibility for handling or processing sensitive Ferrari information (e.g. on substances used to inflate tyres or weight distribution) or deciding how or whether such information would be used or tested. In light of his experience, Coughlan would have known this and if he intended to reveal this information to McLaren, he is unlikely to have done so only to Mr. de la Rosa .
8.11 The WMSC therefore finds that a number of McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, or knew or should have known that other McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, highly confidential Ferrari technical information. In addition, the WMSC finds that there was an intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing.
8.12 The evidence leads the WMSC to conclude that some degree of sporting advantage was obtained, though it may forever be impossible to quantify that advantage in concrete terms.
8.13 These factors lead the WMSC to an appreciation of the gravity of McLaren's breach which is materially different to the appreciation in the 26 July Decision.
On this occasion the WMSC believes that a penalty is merited.
8.14 Having indicated to McLaren that a penalty was likely to be imposed, the WMSC heard submissions regarding the appropriateness of penalties from McLaren and from counsel for Mr. Hamilton. The WMSC has reached its decision having taken due account of those submissions.
9 Decision
9.1 For the foregoing reasons, the WMSC finds McLaren in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
9.2 The WMSC therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the International Sporting Code, imposes the following sanctions relation to the 2007 FIA Formula One World Championship:
- a penalty consisting of exclusion from and withdrawal of all points awarded to McLaren in all rounds of the 2007 Constructors' Championship. For the avoidance of doubt, McLaren will be permitted to race in the remaining rounds of the 2007 Championship but will not be permitted to score points in the Constructors Championship or attend the podium in the event of a top three finish in any of the remaining races in the 2007 season. Points scored by other competitors in the Championship to date will not be affected further to the withdrawal of McLaren's points;
- a fine of USD100 million (less any sum that would have been payable by Formula One Management Limited on account of McLaren's results in the 2007 Constructors Championship had it not been excluded). This fine shall be payable within three months from the date of this Decision.
9.3 Exceptionally, because primary responsibility must rest with McLaren, in the interests of the sport and also because McLaren's drivers were offered immunity from individual sanction by the President of the FIA in his letter dated 30 August 2007, the WMSC does not consider that it is appropriate to impose any sanction on them individually or impose sanctions on McLaren which would affect these drivers' individual Championship standings. As such, both McLaren drivers will retain all the drivers' Championship points they have won so far in the 2007 season and will be permitted to win drivers' Championship points and attend the podium in the remaining races of the 2007 season.
9.4 In addition, in the interest of ensuring that McLaren is not unfairly advantaged as against any of its competitors in the 2008 Championship, the WMSC instructs the FIA technical department to conduct an investigation of McLaren's preparatory work on its 2008 car with a view to determining whether that car incorporates any Ferrari confidential information and report back before the WMSC meeting of December 2007. Once the WMSC has considered this report, a separate Decision will be taken regarding McLaren's participation in the 2008 Championship, including whether any penalty should be imposed. This present Decision does not in any way affect McLaren's entitlement to participate in the 2008 Championship if the entry conditions are fulfilled.
9.5 McLaren is reminded of its right of appeal. In the event that an appeal is lodged with the FIA International Court of Appeal, the effect of this Decision will not be suspended pending the outcome of that appeal.
Signed:
Max Mosley
FIA President
Paris, 13 September 2007
7 Nature of the information held by McLaren
7.1 The WMSC believes that the nature of the information illicitly held by McLaren was information of a nature which, if used or in any way taken into account, could confer a significant sporting advantage upon McLaren.
7.2 Evidence was submitted at the 13 September WMSC meeting by McLaren's Engineering Director, Mr. Lowe, that the dossier of Ferrari information found in Coughlan's possession did not contain information of particular use or interest to McLaren on the basis that the McLaren car was significantly different to the Ferrari car. This submission was apparently made on the basis of the review of the index to the dossier of Ferrari documents (Mr. Lowe having stated that he had not seen the dossier itself).
7.3 The WMSC does not accept this account. In both WMSC hearings and in written submissions, and from the direct knowledge of the WMSC Members, Formula One teams have great interest in each others' technology and go to considerable lengths (within the rules) to study each other's designs and innovations through direct observation, photographic evidence and othermeans. In addition the technical information in Coughlan's possession was, in the WMSC's appreciation, highly significant and could certainly confer a sporting advantage, if used or taken into account.
8 WMSC's Assessment
8.1 The WMSC has carefully considered the evidence and submissions of all parties.
8.2 It has concluded (and intends to re-affirm) that a breach of Article 151(c) has occurred.
8.3 In the 26 July Decision, the WMSC found a breach of Article 151(c). In assessing the gravity of that breach, it took account of a number of factors including any evidence (or, at the time, lack of it) to suggest that the Ferrari information improperly held had actually been used and actually conferred a sporting advantage. Other factors that it took into account included the argument that there was little evidence of the information in question being disseminated to others at McLaren, what the WMSC then understood to be Coughlan's more limited role and the argument that Coughlan was a single rogue employee.
8.4 McLaren has made detailed submissions indicating that none of the information received enhanced the McLaren car. McLaren has suggested to the WMSC that unless "actual use" and a demonstrated and itemised performance advantage can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e. to a criminal law standard of proof), the WMSC is not permitted at law to impose a penalty.
8.5 The WMSC rejects this suggestion. The WMSC has full jurisdiction to apply Article 151(c) and stresses that it is not necessary for it to demonstrate that any confidential Ferrari information was directly copied by McLaren or put to direct use in the McLaren car to justify a finding that Article 151(c) was breached and/or that a penalty is merited. Nor does the WMSC need to show that any information improperly held led to any specifically identified sporting advantage, or indeed any advantage at all. Rather, the WMSC is entitled to treat possession of another team's information as an offence meriting a penalty on its own if it so chooses.
8.6 The fact that in its 26 July Decision, based on more limited evidence, the Council had a different appreciation of the gravity of McLaren's breach does not lead to the creation of a legal test regarding the WMSC's burden of proof.
The WMSC could have imposed a penalty with the 26 July Decision based on the evidence therein, but chose not to (based in part on McLaren's submissions that there had been no dissemination of Ferrari information beyond Mr Coughlan).
8.7 The WMSC has taken note of McLaren's position that an injustice would occur if a penalty were imposed without the FIA having accepted McLaren's offer to inspect the McLaren premises and designs for evidence of Ferrari technology having been copied. However, as noted above, neither the finding of a breach nor the imposition of a penalty require evidence of McLaren having directly incorporated Ferrari technology. Nonetheless, the WMSC have noted and taken account of the open and co-operative nature of this offer and taken this into account in reaching this Decision.
8.8 In light of the evidence now before it, the WMSC does not accept that the only actions of McLaren deserving censure were those of Coughlan. While this situation might have originated with the actions of a single rogue McLaren
employee acting on his own and without McLaren's knowledge or consent, evidence is now available which, when taken in its full context, makes clear that:
- Coughlan had more information than previously appreciated and was receiving information in a systematic manner over a period of months;
- the information has been disseminated, at least to some degree (e.g. to Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso), within the McLaren team;
- the information being disseminated within the McLaren team included not only highly sensitive technical information but also secret information regarding Ferrari's sporting strategy;
- Mr de la Rosa, in the performance of his functions at McLaren, requested and received secret Ferrari information from a source which he knew to be illegitimate and expressly stated that the purpose of his request was to run tests in the simulator;
- the secret information in question was shared with Mr. Alonso;
- there was a clear intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing. If this was not in fact carried into effect it was only because there were technical reasons not to do so;
- Coughlan's role within McLaren (as now understood by the WMSC) put him in a position in which his knowledge of the secret Ferrari information would have influenced him in the performance of his duties.
8.9 It seems to the WMSC clear that Coughlan's actions were intended by him to give McLaren a sporting advantage. He fed information about Ferrari's stopping strategy, braking system, weight distribution and other matters to McLaren's test driver. Furthermore, in light of Coughlan's undoubted experience, he is likely to have known a great deal about how to confer an advantage and the roles of different personnel within the team. It seems most unlikely that he confined his activities to sharing Ferrari's information with Mr. de la Rosa. It also seems most unlikely that his own work was not influenced in some way by the knowledge regarding the Ferrari car that he is known to have possessed.
8.10 Furthermore, it seems entirely unlikely to the WMSC that any Formula One driver would bear the sole responsibility for handling or processing sensitive Ferrari information (e.g. on substances used to inflate tyres or weight distribution) or deciding how or whether such information would be used or tested. In light of his experience, Coughlan would have known this and if he intended to reveal this information to McLaren, he is unlikely to have done so only to Mr. de la Rosa .
8.11 The WMSC therefore finds that a number of McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, or knew or should have known that other McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, highly confidential Ferrari technical information. In addition, the WMSC finds that there was an intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing.
8.12 The evidence leads the WMSC to conclude that some degree of sporting advantage was obtained, though it may forever be impossible to quantify that advantage in concrete terms.
8.13 These factors lead the WMSC to an appreciation of the gravity of McLaren's breach which is materially different to the appreciation in the 26 July Decision.
On this occasion the WMSC believes that a penalty is merited.
8.14 Having indicated to McLaren that a penalty was likely to be imposed, the WMSC heard submissions regarding the appropriateness of penalties from McLaren and from counsel for Mr. Hamilton. The WMSC has reached its decision having taken due account of those submissions.
9 Decision
9.1 For the foregoing reasons, the WMSC finds McLaren in breach of Article 151(c) of the International Sporting Code.
9.2 The WMSC therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the International Sporting Code, imposes the following sanctions relation to the 2007 FIA Formula One World Championship:
- a penalty consisting of exclusion from and withdrawal of all points awarded to McLaren in all rounds of the 2007 Constructors' Championship. For the avoidance of doubt, McLaren will be permitted to race in the remaining rounds of the 2007 Championship but will not be permitted to score points in the Constructors Championship or attend the podium in the event of a top three finish in any of the remaining races in the 2007 season. Points scored by other competitors in the Championship to date will not be affected further to the withdrawal of McLaren's points;
- a fine of USD100 million (less any sum that would have been payable by Formula One Management Limited on account of McLaren's results in the 2007 Constructors Championship had it not been excluded). This fine shall be payable within three months from the date of this Decision.
9.3 Exceptionally, because primary responsibility must rest with McLaren, in the interests of the sport and also because McLaren's drivers were offered immunity from individual sanction by the President of the FIA in his letter dated 30 August 2007, the WMSC does not consider that it is appropriate to impose any sanction on them individually or impose sanctions on McLaren which would affect these drivers' individual Championship standings. As such, both McLaren drivers will retain all the drivers' Championship points they have won so far in the 2007 season and will be permitted to win drivers' Championship points and attend the podium in the remaining races of the 2007 season.
9.4 In addition, in the interest of ensuring that McLaren is not unfairly advantaged as against any of its competitors in the 2008 Championship, the WMSC instructs the FIA technical department to conduct an investigation of McLaren's preparatory work on its 2008 car with a view to determining whether that car incorporates any Ferrari confidential information and report back before the WMSC meeting of December 2007. Once the WMSC has considered this report, a separate Decision will be taken regarding McLaren's participation in the 2008 Championship, including whether any penalty should be imposed. This present Decision does not in any way affect McLaren's entitlement to participate in the 2008 Championship if the entry conditions are fulfilled.
9.5 McLaren is reminded of its right of appeal. In the event that an appeal is lodged with the FIA International Court of Appeal, the effect of this Decision will not be suspended pending the outcome of that appeal.
Signed:
Max Mosley
FIA President
Paris, 13 September 2007
| kwak | 09-14-2007 11:48 AM |
Specific quotes from the long read:
[QUOTE]It seems highly unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]It seems unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...the WMSC considered that it was difficult to reconcile...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...it appeared more likely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...it had seemed unlikely to the WMSC...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...the WMSC regards it as reasonable to infer...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The WMSC does not have evidence that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]However, it is difficult to accept that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...from the direct knowledge of the WMSC Members, Formula One teams have great interest in each others' technology...[/QUOTE]The WMSC Members admit that they [I]would [/I]have used the information?
[QUOTE]8.5 The WMSC rejects this suggestion. The WMSC has full jurisdiction to apply Article 151(c) and stresses that [I]it is not necessary for it to demonstrate that any confidential Ferrari information was directly copied by McLaren or put to direct use in the McLaren car[/I] to justify a finding that Article 151(c) was breached and/or that a penalty is merited. [I]Nor does the WMSC need to show that any information improperly held led to any specifically identified sporting advantage, or indeed any advantage at all.[/I] Rather, the WMSC is entitled to treat possession of another team's information as an offence meriting a penalty on its own if it so chooses. [/QUOTE]Emphasis is mine. The WMSC freely admits that no proof is required.
[QUOTE]...there was a clear intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel .to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing...[/QUOTE]... but it was not used. Intent = guilty
[QUOTE]It seems most unlikely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]It also seems most unlikely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Furthermore, it seems entirely unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...he [Coughlin] is unlikely to...[/QUOTE]
Kinda makes you wonder.
[QUOTE]It seems highly unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]It seems unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...the WMSC considered that it was difficult to reconcile...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...it appeared more likely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...it had seemed unlikely to the WMSC...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...the WMSC regards it as reasonable to infer...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The WMSC does not have evidence that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]However, it is difficult to accept that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...from the direct knowledge of the WMSC Members, Formula One teams have great interest in each others' technology...[/QUOTE]The WMSC Members admit that they [I]would [/I]have used the information?
[QUOTE]8.5 The WMSC rejects this suggestion. The WMSC has full jurisdiction to apply Article 151(c) and stresses that [I]it is not necessary for it to demonstrate that any confidential Ferrari information was directly copied by McLaren or put to direct use in the McLaren car[/I] to justify a finding that Article 151(c) was breached and/or that a penalty is merited. [I]Nor does the WMSC need to show that any information improperly held led to any specifically identified sporting advantage, or indeed any advantage at all.[/I] Rather, the WMSC is entitled to treat possession of another team's information as an offence meriting a penalty on its own if it so chooses. [/QUOTE]Emphasis is mine. The WMSC freely admits that no proof is required.
[QUOTE]...there was a clear intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel .to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing...[/QUOTE]... but it was not used. Intent = guilty
[QUOTE]It seems most unlikely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]It also seems most unlikely that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Furthermore, it seems entirely unlikely to the WMSC that...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...he [Coughlin] is unlikely to...[/QUOTE]
Kinda makes you wonder.
| rupertberr | 09-14-2007 12:01 PM |
McLaren and Ferrari illegally listen to each others transmissions:
[url]http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/40241/[/url]
[QUOTE]
One of the key submissions to the World Motor Sport Council on Thursday came from Ferrari driver Kimi Raikkonen, we can reveal.
The Ferrari driver stated in writing that while he was at McLaren from 2002 until 2006 the team systematically listened to Ferrari�s radio transmissions, which are supposed to be scrambled.
This was put to Ron Dennis in Paris on Thursday, and reportedly a long silence followed before he came up with a reply.
Intriguingly, the Kimi evidence was not part of the report released by the FIA today, and thus has not reached the public domain until now.
Ironically in July Mika Salo revealed to a Finnish newspaper that when at Ferrari in 1999 he regularly received transcripts of Mika Hakkinen�s radio conversations.
Unfortunately for Salo he was driving a Ferrari at the Spa 24 Hours the week that story emerged. A �correction� was soon sent from Maranello explaining what the Finn had meant to say was that in those primitive days sometimes teams accidentally overheard the conversations of rivals�[/QUOTE]
I have had enough of all this BS. Going back to watch my favorite clean sports like the Tour de France and NFL football...Oh never mind.:furious:
[url]http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/40241/[/url]
[QUOTE]
One of the key submissions to the World Motor Sport Council on Thursday came from Ferrari driver Kimi Raikkonen, we can reveal.
The Ferrari driver stated in writing that while he was at McLaren from 2002 until 2006 the team systematically listened to Ferrari�s radio transmissions, which are supposed to be scrambled.
This was put to Ron Dennis in Paris on Thursday, and reportedly a long silence followed before he came up with a reply.
Intriguingly, the Kimi evidence was not part of the report released by the FIA today, and thus has not reached the public domain until now.
Ironically in July Mika Salo revealed to a Finnish newspaper that when at Ferrari in 1999 he regularly received transcripts of Mika Hakkinen�s radio conversations.
Unfortunately for Salo he was driving a Ferrari at the Spa 24 Hours the week that story emerged. A �correction� was soon sent from Maranello explaining what the Finn had meant to say was that in those primitive days sometimes teams accidentally overheard the conversations of rivals�[/QUOTE]
I have had enough of all this BS. Going back to watch my favorite clean sports like the Tour de France and NFL football...Oh never mind.:furious:
| Yotsuya | 09-14-2007 12:44 PM |
There's always rally (with 3.15 manufacturers).
| parker/slc/gc8fan | 09-14-2007 01:36 PM |
I'm less a Ferrari fan now.
| RALLYT-WRX | 09-14-2007 01:40 PM |
[QUOTE=parker/slc/gc8fan;19373318]I'm less a Ferrari fan now.[/QUOTE]
Why's that?
Because they defended their trade secrets? Interesting.
McLaren got caught simple as that.
Why's that?
Because they defended their trade secrets? Interesting.
McLaren got caught simple as that.
| JoD | 09-14-2007 01:41 PM |
Sounds to me like Alonso and PDLR had quite numerous conversations about the info in question, but Lewis wasn't really any part of it. (Granted, I just skimmed the four parts).
Wish ol' Freddy would get thrown out... but then again - I just don't like him. (But everyone knows that). :p
Wish ol' Freddy would get thrown out... but then again - I just don't like him. (But everyone knows that). :p
| minifreak | 09-14-2007 02:00 PM |
I wonder what they would find if they were to go after Ferrari too. "Oops, how did that diagram end up here?"
| JoD | 09-14-2007 02:04 PM |
[QUOTE=minifreak;19373692]I wonder what they would find if they were to go after Ferrari too. "Oops, how did that diagram end up here?"[/QUOTE]
I am 100% positive nearly every team in F1 cheats. Like I have said numerous times, I love Kimi, but I can't stand Ferrari. They are the most underhanded team in F1, IMO.
I am 100% positive nearly every team in F1 cheats. Like I have said numerous times, I love Kimi, but I can't stand Ferrari. They are the most underhanded team in F1, IMO.
| rupertberr | 09-14-2007 02:19 PM |
[QUOTE=RALLYT-WRX;19373367]Why's that?
Because they defended their trade secrets? Interesting.
McLaren got caught simple as that.[/QUOTE]
and Ferrari didn't get caught. They are both guilty and so is most of the rest of the grid. Only McLaren seems to be paying the price.
Because they defended their trade secrets? Interesting.
McLaren got caught simple as that.[/QUOTE]
and Ferrari didn't get caught. They are both guilty and so is most of the rest of the grid. Only McLaren seems to be paying the price.
| rupertberr | 09-14-2007 03:22 PM |
[B]Ecclestone fought to keep McLaren in[/B]
Autosport:
[QUOTE]Ecclestone fought to keep McLaren in
By Pablo Elizalde Friday, September 14th 2007, 17:10 GMT
Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone has said he campaigned for McLaren to be fined, the Briton admitting the Woking-based squad came close to exclusion from the championship for two years.
"It came very close to McLaren being thrown out, it really was a genuine possibility," Ecclestone told the BBC on Friday.
"A few of us sort of battled on and campaigned for the fine instead," he added.
McLaren were stripped of all their constructors' championship points and fined $100 million in the spy controversy hearing on Thursday.
Ecclestone said the possibility of an exclusion was "much closer than everybody says", and the Briton admitted that would have been bad for the sport.
"Formula One is now more open than it has ever been because the threat is definitely there now if any team is helping anyone else," added Ecclestone. "Even if it is a smaller team than McLaren, they're gone, without any hesitation.
"The alternative to the fine was worse, being excluded from the championship for two years. It was much closer than everybody says it was.
"It really would have been bad news. McLaren would have lost more than they have been fined, if they'd have not been able to keep going."[/QUOTE]
Autosport:
[QUOTE]Ecclestone fought to keep McLaren in
By Pablo Elizalde Friday, September 14th 2007, 17:10 GMT
Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone has said he campaigned for McLaren to be fined, the Briton admitting the Woking-based squad came close to exclusion from the championship for two years.
"It came very close to McLaren being thrown out, it really was a genuine possibility," Ecclestone told the BBC on Friday.
"A few of us sort of battled on and campaigned for the fine instead," he added.
McLaren were stripped of all their constructors' championship points and fined $100 million in the spy controversy hearing on Thursday.
Ecclestone said the possibility of an exclusion was "much closer than everybody says", and the Briton admitted that would have been bad for the sport.
"Formula One is now more open than it has ever been because the threat is definitely there now if any team is helping anyone else," added Ecclestone. "Even if it is a smaller team than McLaren, they're gone, without any hesitation.
"The alternative to the fine was worse, being excluded from the championship for two years. It was much closer than everybody says it was.
"It really would have been bad news. McLaren would have lost more than they have been fined, if they'd have not been able to keep going."[/QUOTE]
| rupertberr | 09-14-2007 03:25 PM |
[B]Dennis tipped off FIA about evidence [/B]
[QUOTE]Dennis tipped off FIA about evidence
Friday, September 14th 2007, 17:38 GMT
McLaren boss Ron Dennis said on Friday that he had tipped off the governing body about evidence that cost his team the Formula One constructors' title and a record $100 million fine.
"[B]Once I became aware that new evidence might exist, which I did on the morning of the Hungarian Grand Prix [/B](August 5), I immediately phoned the FIA to keep them informed," he said in a statement at the Belgian Grand Prix.
McLaren were stripped of their 2007 constructors' points and fined on Thursday after the International Automobile Federation (FIA) found they had gained from confidential Ferrari information.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm. I wonder if this was when Alonso was pissed about getting screwed in Hungary and then spilled the beans....
[QUOTE]Dennis tipped off FIA about evidence
Friday, September 14th 2007, 17:38 GMT
McLaren boss Ron Dennis said on Friday that he had tipped off the governing body about evidence that cost his team the Formula One constructors' title and a record $100 million fine.
"[B]Once I became aware that new evidence might exist, which I did on the morning of the Hungarian Grand Prix [/B](August 5), I immediately phoned the FIA to keep them informed," he said in a statement at the Belgian Grand Prix.
McLaren were stripped of their 2007 constructors' points and fined on Thursday after the International Automobile Federation (FIA) found they had gained from confidential Ferrari information.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm. I wonder if this was when Alonso was pissed about getting screwed in Hungary and then spilled the beans....
| rupertberr | 09-14-2007 06:01 PM |
Renault next
�
�
Renault next
From Speed:
[QUOTE]The matter first came to light at McLaren when the team did a thorough review of its IT systems in an attempt to see whether any information relating to Ferrari and Nigel Stepney had been passed around.
During that search it was discovered that a team member who had subsequently moved to Renault had downloaded information. It�s believed that he took three CDs of data with him to Renault.
On becoming aware via a source that McLaren was already conducting an investigation into the matter, Briatore personally approached Ron Dennis at Monza and volunteered that Renault had indeed obtained some McLaren information.
We understand that the initial �shopping list� of information he offered did not entirely match up with that already compiled by McLaren as being copied. Subsequently Renault has added further items to its original list.
Questioned on the subject at the FIA press conference on Friday, Briatore said, �I think McLaren was judged by the World Council, and there was enough evidence to find McLaren guilty � it�s as simple as that. I don�t want, at this moment [to talk] about Renault because, first, we are not being investigated, second we give all our evidence to McLaren and to Mr. Mosley and to the Federation.�
The matter is now being discussed by lawyers representing to the two teams. [B]Curiously thus far there has been no indication from the FIA that it will pursue a case against Renault.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
and why once again does McLaren get hammered and no one else???
From Speed:
[QUOTE]The matter first came to light at McLaren when the team did a thorough review of its IT systems in an attempt to see whether any information relating to Ferrari and Nigel Stepney had been passed around.
During that search it was discovered that a team member who had subsequently moved to Renault had downloaded information. It�s believed that he took three CDs of data with him to Renault.
On becoming aware via a source that McLaren was already conducting an investigation into the matter, Briatore personally approached Ron Dennis at Monza and volunteered that Renault had indeed obtained some McLaren information.
We understand that the initial �shopping list� of information he offered did not entirely match up with that already compiled by McLaren as being copied. Subsequently Renault has added further items to its original list.
Questioned on the subject at the FIA press conference on Friday, Briatore said, �I think McLaren was judged by the World Council, and there was enough evidence to find McLaren guilty � it�s as simple as that. I don�t want, at this moment [to talk] about Renault because, first, we are not being investigated, second we give all our evidence to McLaren and to Mr. Mosley and to the Federation.�
The matter is now being discussed by lawyers representing to the two teams. [B]Curiously thus far there has been no indication from the FIA that it will pursue a case against Renault.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
and why once again does McLaren get hammered and no one else???
| kwak | 09-14-2007 10:13 PM |
[QUOTE=rupertberr;19376685]and why once again does McLaren get hammered and no one else???[/QUOTE]Because Renault, and everyone else, is not a threat to Ferrari, the favored child.
Same as when Schumacher stopped his car on course at Monaco in qualifying to hinder other drivers efforts. He lost qualifying positions, but that is all. Alonso hinders [I]his own teammate [/I]in the pits during qualifying (no one else) and loses qualifying positions... and McLaren loses manufacturers points. Which benefits whom?
Same as when Schumacher stopped his car on course at Monaco in qualifying to hinder other drivers efforts. He lost qualifying positions, but that is all. Alonso hinders [I]his own teammate [/I]in the pits during qualifying (no one else) and loses qualifying positions... and McLaren loses manufacturers points. Which benefits whom?
| rupertberr | 09-15-2007 11:18 AM |
It was good to hear that a Ferrari mechanic and a McLaren mechanic shook hands on Friday.
[QUOTE]Mosley questions Dennis's integrity
By Biranit Goren Saturday, September 15th 2007, 13:00 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley has questioned McLaren team chief Ron Dennis's integrity in his dealing with the governing body during the spying affair - but Dennis himself has defended his actions by insisting he was truthful throughout.
Mosley recounted the events that led the FIA to contact the McLaren drivers and request their collaboration, which resulted in new evidence submitted to the World Motor Sport Council against McLaren.
And the FIA president believes Dennis was not telling him the whole truth on the affair.
Speaking on ITV today, Mosley said: "On the morning of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Ron rang me and he said, 'I've just had Alonso in the motorhome and he says he's got information and he's threatening to give it to the Federation.'
"So I said, 'What did you say Ron?' He said, 'I said, go on and hand it over.'
"I said, 'Ron, you said exactly the right thing.'
"And then Ron said, 'But there isn't any information.'
"So I said, 'So it's an empty threat?'
"And he replied: 'Yes, a completely empty threat. There's no information, there's nothing to come out; I can assure you that if there was something, Max, I would have told you.'
"Now this was a week after looking me in the eye in the World Council and telling me there was absolutely nothing wrong and everybody had done exactly as they should do, so I believed him.
"I've known Ron for 40 years; it's very difficult for me, when somebody I've known for 40 years looks me in the eye and says, 'Max, I'm telling the truth with complete sincerity' - you believe him.
"It was only when I got the list from the Italian police [showing] 323 SMS phone calls going over a three-month period between Coughlan and Stepney, [that I concluded] there had to be more to this.
"You don't get 300 messages arranging a visit to Honda. This is something serious. At which point, I sat down and wrote the letter to the drivers, and the rest is history."
Dennis quickly responded to Mosley's accusations, defending his actions and stating at the time of speaking with Mosley, he was telling the truth based on what he himself knew at the time.
"I was a little surprised by what Max said," Dennis told ITV. "I am working hard to get closure on a very unpleasant experience that McLaren have had.
"I don't want to get into the detail, but I do want to address one thing, and that is that when someone asks me a question - and I've answered some difficult questions - at the time I made those answers I told the complete truth.
"At the point of the first hearing, when I was asked the question did I know anything more, the truth was, I didn't.
"The emails that passed between our drivers were as big a surprise to me when I heard, as anyone else - and as I said, if they existed, what I said to Fernando was that he must give them to the FIA.
"I just want to be very clear that at no stage did I ever say any lie to anybody.
"I put my integrity above everything. I just want to be very clear about that particular point."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Mosley questions Dennis's integrity
By Biranit Goren Saturday, September 15th 2007, 13:00 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley has questioned McLaren team chief Ron Dennis's integrity in his dealing with the governing body during the spying affair - but Dennis himself has defended his actions by insisting he was truthful throughout.
Mosley recounted the events that led the FIA to contact the McLaren drivers and request their collaboration, which resulted in new evidence submitted to the World Motor Sport Council against McLaren.
And the FIA president believes Dennis was not telling him the whole truth on the affair.
Speaking on ITV today, Mosley said: "On the morning of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Ron rang me and he said, 'I've just had Alonso in the motorhome and he says he's got information and he's threatening to give it to the Federation.'
"So I said, 'What did you say Ron?' He said, 'I said, go on and hand it over.'
"I said, 'Ron, you said exactly the right thing.'
"And then Ron said, 'But there isn't any information.'
"So I said, 'So it's an empty threat?'
"And he replied: 'Yes, a completely empty threat. There's no information, there's nothing to come out; I can assure you that if there was something, Max, I would have told you.'
"Now this was a week after looking me in the eye in the World Council and telling me there was absolutely nothing wrong and everybody had done exactly as they should do, so I believed him.
"I've known Ron for 40 years; it's very difficult for me, when somebody I've known for 40 years looks me in the eye and says, 'Max, I'm telling the truth with complete sincerity' - you believe him.
"It was only when I got the list from the Italian police [showing] 323 SMS phone calls going over a three-month period between Coughlan and Stepney, [that I concluded] there had to be more to this.
"You don't get 300 messages arranging a visit to Honda. This is something serious. At which point, I sat down and wrote the letter to the drivers, and the rest is history."
Dennis quickly responded to Mosley's accusations, defending his actions and stating at the time of speaking with Mosley, he was telling the truth based on what he himself knew at the time.
"I was a little surprised by what Max said," Dennis told ITV. "I am working hard to get closure on a very unpleasant experience that McLaren have had.
"I don't want to get into the detail, but I do want to address one thing, and that is that when someone asks me a question - and I've answered some difficult questions - at the time I made those answers I told the complete truth.
"At the point of the first hearing, when I was asked the question did I know anything more, the truth was, I didn't.
"The emails that passed between our drivers were as big a surprise to me when I heard, as anyone else - and as I said, if they existed, what I said to Fernando was that he must give them to the FIA.
"I just want to be very clear that at no stage did I ever say any lie to anybody.
"I put my integrity above everything. I just want to be very clear about that particular point."[/QUOTE]
| rupertberr | 09-15-2007 11:22 AM |
Why Alonso hasn't been fired:
[QUOTE]Alonso row led to McLaren's downfall
By Alan Baldwin Saturday, September 15th 2007, 12:46 GMT
McLaren boss Ron Dennis has defended Fernando Alonso against suggestions the Formula One champion should be fired for his role in a spying scandal that cost the team a title and $100 million.
Revealing how a row with the Spaniard on the morning of last month's Hungarian Grand Prix triggered a phone call that led to the loss of all McLaren's 2007 constructors' points and a record fine, Dennis made clear on Saturday he had only one aim.
"My job is to win the world championship. My job isn't for people to love and hug me," he told British reporters at the Belgian Grand Prix after being asked directly why he had not fired his driver.
"If I have difficult relationships with people, I have difficult relationships with them. You don't take your guns out and shoot people every which way.
"It's not a love-in. I want to have positive relationships with my drivers but it's difficult sometimes."
While Dennis would not go into details of their meeting in Budapest, he said Alonso had mentioned e-mails in his possession that could incriminate the team in an investigation into leaked Ferrari data.
British newspaper reports on Saturday accused the 26-year-old of demanding at the meeting that the team either make him their number one driver or let him go, and threatening to go to the governing FIA.
The Guardian quoted Alonso's manager Luis Garcia denying the reports as "complete rubbish".
The Spaniard, reported to be seeking a return to Renault, had been stripped of pole position and demoted five places the day before for impeding 22-year-old British rookie teammate Lewis Hamilton in qualifying.
Alonso's relationship with the team had already turned sour by then over their refusal to favour him over championship-leading Hamilton.
"Fernando arrived, pretty upset by many things. I'm not going to give you the detail," said Dennis.
"In a conversation that took place he said 'I have something in my e-mail system which is from one of your engineers'.
"(McLaren chief executive) Martin (Whitmarsh) and I looked at each other and Martin said 'Fernando should inform the FIA'.
"When Fernando left, I phoned the FIA. I told them what happened and put the phone down.
"Half an hour later, Fernando's manager came back and said 'look I'm sorry, he was angry blah blah blah' and retracted everything," said Dennis.
The Briton said he again rang the FIA and after the race Alonso came to his office and apologised for what had happened.
At the end of the month, the International Automobile Federation (FIA) wrote to the McLaren drivers asking them to hand over any information they had about Ferrari technical information obtained from now-suspended chief designer Mike Coughlan.
The FIA on Friday published e-mails from the team's test driver Pedro de la Rosa and Alonso, evidence presented at a hearing in Paris that imposed the sanctions on McLaren.
Dennis likened the Hungary incident to a domestic row when one partner says something that they did not mean and then regretted.
"That is the benefit I am giving to Fernando," he said. "My objective is to win races. I believe that if someone says things, and subsequently retracts them and apologises, I move on."
Dennis also dismissed a suggestion that Alonso's behaviour towards him had been the most extreme he had experienced from a driver in 40 years in the sport.
[B]"It's the most extreme thing that you know about," he said. "I could tell you some things...I would like you to understand the nature of competitive animals. They know no limit."[/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Alonso row led to McLaren's downfall
By Alan Baldwin Saturday, September 15th 2007, 12:46 GMT
McLaren boss Ron Dennis has defended Fernando Alonso against suggestions the Formula One champion should be fired for his role in a spying scandal that cost the team a title and $100 million.
Revealing how a row with the Spaniard on the morning of last month's Hungarian Grand Prix triggered a phone call that led to the loss of all McLaren's 2007 constructors' points and a record fine, Dennis made clear on Saturday he had only one aim.
"My job is to win the world championship. My job isn't for people to love and hug me," he told British reporters at the Belgian Grand Prix after being asked directly why he had not fired his driver.
"If I have difficult relationships with people, I have difficult relationships with them. You don't take your guns out and shoot people every which way.
"It's not a love-in. I want to have positive relationships with my drivers but it's difficult sometimes."
While Dennis would not go into details of their meeting in Budapest, he said Alonso had mentioned e-mails in his possession that could incriminate the team in an investigation into leaked Ferrari data.
British newspaper reports on Saturday accused the 26-year-old of demanding at the meeting that the team either make him their number one driver or let him go, and threatening to go to the governing FIA.
The Guardian quoted Alonso's manager Luis Garcia denying the reports as "complete rubbish".
The Spaniard, reported to be seeking a return to Renault, had been stripped of pole position and demoted five places the day before for impeding 22-year-old British rookie teammate Lewis Hamilton in qualifying.
Alonso's relationship with the team had already turned sour by then over their refusal to favour him over championship-leading Hamilton.
"Fernando arrived, pretty upset by many things. I'm not going to give you the detail," said Dennis.
"In a conversation that took place he said 'I have something in my e-mail system which is from one of your engineers'.
"(McLaren chief executive) Martin (Whitmarsh) and I looked at each other and Martin said 'Fernando should inform the FIA'.
"When Fernando left, I phoned the FIA. I told them what happened and put the phone down.
"Half an hour later, Fernando's manager came back and said 'look I'm sorry, he was angry blah blah blah' and retracted everything," said Dennis.
The Briton said he again rang the FIA and after the race Alonso came to his office and apologised for what had happened.
At the end of the month, the International Automobile Federation (FIA) wrote to the McLaren drivers asking them to hand over any information they had about Ferrari technical information obtained from now-suspended chief designer Mike Coughlan.
The FIA on Friday published e-mails from the team's test driver Pedro de la Rosa and Alonso, evidence presented at a hearing in Paris that imposed the sanctions on McLaren.
Dennis likened the Hungary incident to a domestic row when one partner says something that they did not mean and then regretted.
"That is the benefit I am giving to Fernando," he said. "My objective is to win races. I believe that if someone says things, and subsequently retracts them and apologises, I move on."
Dennis also dismissed a suggestion that Alonso's behaviour towards him had been the most extreme he had experienced from a driver in 40 years in the sport.
[B]"It's the most extreme thing that you know about," he said. "I could tell you some things...I would like you to understand the nature of competitive animals. They know no limit."[/B][/QUOTE]
| rupertberr | 09-15-2007 11:31 AM |
Max, $100m isn't that much. McLaren budget for 2007 is $450m.
[QUOTE]
Mosley: McLaren penalty too lenient
By Jonathan Noble Saturday, September 15th 2007, 12:45 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley believes the decision to hand McLaren a record US$100 million fine for spying could actually be considered as too lenient.
Having delivered what is believed to be the biggest fine in sporting history, Mosley said that McLaren's fine had to be put in perspective - and that the team were lucky not to be thrown out of the championship for two years.
"That 100 million dollars is less than the difference between his budget and that of Frank Williams, Renault and several other teams," Mosley told reporters in the Spa-Francorchamps paddock.
"So it is a very minor punishment as such. Half of it roughly will go to the other teams, the other half, if the World Council agree with me, we are going to distribute to our ASN's (National Sporting Authorities) worldwide to bring on our young drivers. Anything less than that will have no effect at all.
"All you are doing is bringing his budget down to the level of some of the other top teams in the paddock. It is absurd to say it is unfair or disproportionate.
"Anybody looking at marketing value, who was presented in April with that 780-pages on running a top team, would have been very happy paying $100 million to have it - never mind the 300 communications that went backwards and forwards.
"It is a very modest penalty indeed, and they are extremely lucky that we didn't quite simply say: you have polluted the championship in 2007, you have probably polluted it in 2008 because we have no way of knowing what information you are using in your 2007 and 2008 cars, so you had better stay out of the championship until 2009 if you are still around, so that way we know it is completely fair.
"We didn't do that, and when history looks back at this maybe that is what we are reproached with. Not with doing too much, but with maybe doing too little."
Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone told the BBC on Friday that McLaren were very close to being excluded from the 2007 and 2008 championships and a decision to impose the fine was made at the last minute.
"Someone, I understand, had left the meeting," said Ecclestone about how close the decision was. "And, as usual, people can't stop talking. And had said something to the press.
"Someone came in and said there has been an announcement, that McLaren had been excluded from the championship for two years. So that's how close it was. Obviously the person that had left, thought that's what the result was."
When asked why there had been a change of heart, Ecclestone said: "Well, I think people thought, you know, that excluded for two years was bad news and that would have been, financially for McLaren, around that figure. Actually it would have been more, they would have lost more. So it was brought back to them.
"They would have been wiped out. They would have been worse off."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
Mosley: McLaren penalty too lenient
By Jonathan Noble Saturday, September 15th 2007, 12:45 GMT
FIA president Max Mosley believes the decision to hand McLaren a record US$100 million fine for spying could actually be considered as too lenient.
Having delivered what is believed to be the biggest fine in sporting history, Mosley said that McLaren's fine had to be put in perspective - and that the team were lucky not to be thrown out of the championship for two years.
"That 100 million dollars is less than the difference between his budget and that of Frank Williams, Renault and several other teams," Mosley told reporters in the Spa-Francorchamps paddock.
"So it is a very minor punishment as such. Half of it roughly will go to the other teams, the other half, if the World Council agree with me, we are going to distribute to our ASN's (National Sporting Authorities) worldwide to bring on our young drivers. Anything less than that will have no effect at all.
"All you are doing is bringing his budget down to the level of some of the other top teams in the paddock. It is absurd to say it is unfair or disproportionate.
"Anybody looking at marketing value, who was presented in April with that 780-pages on running a top team, would have been very happy paying $100 million to have it - never mind the 300 communications that went backwards and forwards.
"It is a very modest penalty indeed, and they are extremely lucky that we didn't quite simply say: you have polluted the championship in 2007, you have probably polluted it in 2008 because we have no way of knowing what information you are using in your 2007 and 2008 cars, so you had better stay out of the championship until 2009 if you are still around, so that way we know it is completely fair.
"We didn't do that, and when history looks back at this maybe that is what we are reproached with. Not with doing too much, but with maybe doing too little."
Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone told the BBC on Friday that McLaren were very close to being excluded from the 2007 and 2008 championships and a decision to impose the fine was made at the last minute.
"Someone, I understand, had left the meeting," said Ecclestone about how close the decision was. "And, as usual, people can't stop talking. And had said something to the press.
"Someone came in and said there has been an announcement, that McLaren had been excluded from the championship for two years. So that's how close it was. Obviously the person that had left, thought that's what the result was."
When asked why there had been a change of heart, Ecclestone said: "Well, I think people thought, you know, that excluded for two years was bad news and that would have been, financially for McLaren, around that figure. Actually it would have been more, they would have lost more. So it was brought back to them.
"They would have been wiped out. They would have been worse off."[/QUOTE]
| finnRex | 09-15-2007 11:47 AM |
[QUOTE=JoD;19373758]I am 100% positive nearly every team in F1 cheats. Like I have said numerous times, I love Kimi, but I can't stand Ferrari. They are the most underhanded team in F1, IMO.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I can't get into this season, and it's almost over. I do like Hamilton though, as he has REALLY surprised quite a few folks.
[QUOTE=kwak;19378690]Because Renault, and everyone else, is not a threat to Ferrari, the favored child.[/QUOTE]
+1. Once people realize that FIA is very close to Ferrari and protects Ferrari, the glamour of F1 goes away.
Mika
Agreed. I can't get into this season, and it's almost over. I do like Hamilton though, as he has REALLY surprised quite a few folks.
[QUOTE=kwak;19378690]Because Renault, and everyone else, is not a threat to Ferrari, the favored child.[/QUOTE]
+1. Once people realize that FIA is very close to Ferrari and protects Ferrari, the glamour of F1 goes away.
Mika
| SubaruImpreza_power | 09-15-2007 12:05 PM |
Man.. I used to watch F1 A LOT when it was called Speedvision but now with all this bickering and rule changes and crap last time I watched F1 on tv longer then 40 min was about 2 1/2 years ago :-/
| OnTheGas | 09-17-2007 03:11 AM |
Can't understand the hatred...
�
�
The hatred for the red team and Alonso is interesting to observe...
If FIA was biased toward Ferrari, then we would not have seen the silver cars on the track at Spa... they would have been out till 2009.
Meanwhile, Alonso has been outdriving his team-mate (by analysis of laptimes) since the British GP.
[LIST][*]British GP: Hamilton starts on pole, Alonso starts 3rd. Hamilton drops 2 positions to 3rd, while Alonso moves up to 2nd on faster laptimes.[*]Euro GP (Nurburgring): Incredible, and variably, wet conditions, but Alonso passes Massa in the last laps for victory, while Hamilton is unlucky & gets caught out, keeps the fire lit, but finishes at the back.[*]Hungarian GP: Alonso penalized & stays mired in traffic all day while Hamilton wins.[*]Turkey: Both McLarens start poorly, with Hamilton dropping 1 position off the grid, while Alonso falls back to 6th behind the Beemers. After Alonso gets past both Beemers and gains clear air, Alonso's laptimes are better than Hamilton's times. Unfortunately, Hamilton has a tire failure, costing him 2 positions.[*]Italy: First stint, Alonso heavier but Hamilton hangs ~1.5 behind him. 2nd stint, Alonso pulls 6 sec gap on Hamilton, and wins, w/Hamilton 2nd.[*]Belgium: 1st & 2nd stints, Alonso is faster than Hamilton, and pulls a safe gap to take podium behind faster Ferraris, while Hamilton follows in 4th.[/LIST]The way Alonso is driving now reminds me of his successful championship fights against Michael... He is very fast, consistent, and focused on winning the championship.
While there is no doubt that Hamilton is a phenomenon, Alonso has recently surpassed his younger team-mate in performance. They are an incredible pairing of team-mates, and a fabulous battle to watch.
If FIA was biased toward Ferrari, then we would not have seen the silver cars on the track at Spa... they would have been out till 2009.
Meanwhile, Alonso has been outdriving his team-mate (by analysis of laptimes) since the British GP.
[LIST][*]British GP: Hamilton starts on pole, Alonso starts 3rd. Hamilton drops 2 positions to 3rd, while Alonso moves up to 2nd on faster laptimes.[*]Euro GP (Nurburgring): Incredible, and variably, wet conditions, but Alonso passes Massa in the last laps for victory, while Hamilton is unlucky & gets caught out, keeps the fire lit, but finishes at the back.[*]Hungarian GP: Alonso penalized & stays mired in traffic all day while Hamilton wins.[*]Turkey: Both McLarens start poorly, with Hamilton dropping 1 position off the grid, while Alonso falls back to 6th behind the Beemers. After Alonso gets past both Beemers and gains clear air, Alonso's laptimes are better than Hamilton's times. Unfortunately, Hamilton has a tire failure, costing him 2 positions.[*]Italy: First stint, Alonso heavier but Hamilton hangs ~1.5 behind him. 2nd stint, Alonso pulls 6 sec gap on Hamilton, and wins, w/Hamilton 2nd.[*]Belgium: 1st & 2nd stints, Alonso is faster than Hamilton, and pulls a safe gap to take podium behind faster Ferraris, while Hamilton follows in 4th.[/LIST]The way Alonso is driving now reminds me of his successful championship fights against Michael... He is very fast, consistent, and focused on winning the championship.
While there is no doubt that Hamilton is a phenomenon, Alonso has recently surpassed his younger team-mate in performance. They are an incredible pairing of team-mates, and a fabulous battle to watch.
| Ferg | 09-17-2007 10:43 AM |
Eh, I've always had a soft spot for Alonso and I'd like to think that hasn't waned even as he's made it hard to cheer for him a few times over his career. I do believe he's still by far the most complete driver on the grid.
Plus I absolutely LOVE this picture of him. Mostly because he really looks like he's about to climb aboard an Auto Union, but also because it looks like he's wearing a cape.
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/85745953/large.jpg[/IMG]
It's the little things about F1 that keep me coming back.
On a side note I just started reading The Grand Prix Saboteurs by Joe Saward which tells the tale of a pair of drivers, Willy Grover and Robert Benoist who both became British secret agents against the Nazis and paid the ultimate price. Grover was the guy who won the very first Monaco Grand Prix. It's fantastic stuff.
Plus I absolutely LOVE this picture of him. Mostly because he really looks like he's about to climb aboard an Auto Union, but also because it looks like he's wearing a cape.
[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/image/85745953/large.jpg[/IMG]
It's the little things about F1 that keep me coming back.
On a side note I just started reading The Grand Prix Saboteurs by Joe Saward which tells the tale of a pair of drivers, Willy Grover and Robert Benoist who both became British secret agents against the Nazis and paid the ultimate price. Grover was the guy who won the very first Monaco Grand Prix. It's fantastic stuff.
| Gil | 09-17-2007 10:52 AM |
freg, you are so strange. :lol:
| artkevin | 09-17-2007 11:50 AM |
I agree with you on just about every single point Ferg.
| Wr4wrX | 09-18-2007 06:45 PM |
Look who grew a bridge-nose. (Jerez testing.)
[IMG]http://www.autosport.com/gallery/picture_free.php/dir/2007septest1/image/l__h0y9936-2[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.autosport.com/gallery/picture_free.php/dir/2007septest1/image/l__h0y9936-2[/IMG]
| Dogbert2 | 09-18-2007 08:53 PM |
[QUOTE]Honda "influenced" satellite operation Super Aguri's Belgian Grand Prix in a bid to save the works team from further embarrassment, according to rumours after the Spa Francorchamps event.
The website of American broadcaster Speed TV cited "sources close to" the Leafield-based team as accusing its engine and chassis supplier of not allowing Super Aguri to use a wing that it tested successfully at the Spa test in July.
Anthony Davidson and Takuma Sato were subsequently offered less effective options, including a Barcelona-spec wing, whereafter Davidson said his car was "undriveable."
After Sato and Davidson qualified 19th and 21st, the team's Sporting Director Graham Taylor said: "We are in the position our opposition has wanted for a long time now. They've expected us to be at this level and, sportingly, we have succumbed to their behest."
In the end, Honda's works team fared little better, however, and remain two points behind the satellite squad run by former Japanese driver Aguri Suzuki.
It is also rumoured that flagging support for Super Aguri from Tokyo has forced Suzuki to sell a considerable portion of his team to an unnamed Japanese businessman. The deal could be unveiled next week at Fuji.
[/QUOTE]
Way to go Honda.
The website of American broadcaster Speed TV cited "sources close to" the Leafield-based team as accusing its engine and chassis supplier of not allowing Super Aguri to use a wing that it tested successfully at the Spa test in July.
Anthony Davidson and Takuma Sato were subsequently offered less effective options, including a Barcelona-spec wing, whereafter Davidson said his car was "undriveable."
After Sato and Davidson qualified 19th and 21st, the team's Sporting Director Graham Taylor said: "We are in the position our opposition has wanted for a long time now. They've expected us to be at this level and, sportingly, we have succumbed to their behest."
In the end, Honda's works team fared little better, however, and remain two points behind the satellite squad run by former Japanese driver Aguri Suzuki.
It is also rumoured that flagging support for Super Aguri from Tokyo has forced Suzuki to sell a considerable portion of his team to an unnamed Japanese businessman. The deal could be unveiled next week at Fuji.
[/QUOTE]
Way to go Honda.
| meebs | 09-18-2007 11:13 PM |
Fernando is like Barry Bonds to me of F1. He is extremely good at what he does... yet there's something about him I just can't stand. Could be the whining... yep, it's the whining.
| richde | 09-19-2007 10:43 AM |
[quote=parker/slc/gc8fan;19373318]I'm less a Ferrari fan now.[/quote]
[quote=JoD;19373758]I am 100% positive nearly every team in F1 cheats. Like I have said numerous times, I love Kimi, but I can't stand Ferrari. They are the most underhanded team in F1, IMO.[/quote]
The lack of objectivity in some sports fan is disturbing, but hardly suprising.
[quote=rupertberr;19374819][B]Dennis tipped off FIA about evidence [/B]
Hmmm. I wonder if this was when Alonso was pissed about getting screwed in Hungary and then spilled the beans....[/quote]
Yes, how long after they obtained the documents did ole' Ronny give it up to the FIA. Mid March they started getting info from Stepney. That guy (Coughlan) should have been fired on the spot when he offered to pass along 700+ pages of another team's technical documents. That's what a honest person, or at least a dishonest person with a healthy fear of the FIA's draconian punishments, should do.
[quote=OnTheGas;19395327]The hatred for the red team and Alonso is interesting to observe...
If FIA was biased toward Ferrari, then we would not have seen the silver cars on the track at Spa... they would have been out till 2009.
Meanwhile, Alonso has been outdriving his team-mate (by analysis of laptimes) since the British GP.[LIST][*]British GP: Hamilton starts on pole, Alonso starts 3rd. Hamilton drops 2 positions to 3rd, while Alonso moves up to 2nd on faster laptimes.[*]Euro GP (Nurburgring): Incredible, and variably, wet conditions, but Alonso passes Massa in the last laps for victory, while Hamilton is unlucky & gets caught out, keeps the fire lit, but finishes at the back.[*]Hungarian GP: Alonso penalized & stays mired in traffic all day while Hamilton wins.[*]Turkey: Both McLarens start poorly, with Hamilton dropping 1 position off the grid, while Alonso falls back to 6th behind the Beemers. After Alonso gets past both Beemers and gains clear air, Alonso's laptimes are better than Hamilton's times. Unfortunately, Hamilton has a tire failure, costing him 2 positions.[*]Italy: First stint, Alonso heavier but Hamilton hangs ~1.5 behind him. 2nd stint, Alonso pulls 6 sec gap on Hamilton, and wins, w/Hamilton 2nd.[*]Belgium: 1st & 2nd stints, Alonso is faster than Hamilton, and pulls a safe gap to take podium behind faster Ferraris, while Hamilton follows in 4th.[/LIST]The way Alonso is driving now reminds me of his successful championship fights against Michael... He is very fast, consistent, and focused on winning the championship.
While there is no doubt that Hamilton is a phenomenon, Alonso has recently surpassed his younger team-mate in performance. They are an incredible pairing of team-mates, and a fabulous battle to watch.[/quote]
That's the God's honest truth there. The McLaren drivers could have been stripped of their points just as easily. Their team, their SPORTS team has been found guilty of industrial espionage. If the test driver knew, you can't deny that the team principal knew WELL before the allegations came to light. That's more than enough justification to remove a team from competition. It's only Bernie and the bunch's desire to actually have an F1 season that kept the silver cars on F1 courses this and next year.
This is the year of surprising and/or disappointing teammates. You could say that Alonso has outperformed his teammate, but not like a two time World Champion should have dominated a rookie teammate. The same goes for Kimi, has he done better than Massa? Sure, but he's not punishing him like everybody predicted would happen, there's only three races left and there's 7 points separating the "red car" drivers. I'd say that Felipe deserves a little more credit than everybody's given him in the past.
Everybody's hoping to find the "next Schumacher," it's not Fernando, and it's not Kimi either.
[quote=JoD;19373758]I am 100% positive nearly every team in F1 cheats. Like I have said numerous times, I love Kimi, but I can't stand Ferrari. They are the most underhanded team in F1, IMO.[/quote]
The lack of objectivity in some sports fan is disturbing, but hardly suprising.
[quote=rupertberr;19374819][B]Dennis tipped off FIA about evidence [/B]
Hmmm. I wonder if this was when Alonso was pissed about getting screwed in Hungary and then spilled the beans....[/quote]
Yes, how long after they obtained the documents did ole' Ronny give it up to the FIA. Mid March they started getting info from Stepney. That guy (Coughlan) should have been fired on the spot when he offered to pass along 700+ pages of another team's technical documents. That's what a honest person, or at least a dishonest person with a healthy fear of the FIA's draconian punishments, should do.
[quote=OnTheGas;19395327]The hatred for the red team and Alonso is interesting to observe...
If FIA was biased toward Ferrari, then we would not have seen the silver cars on the track at Spa... they would have been out till 2009.
Meanwhile, Alonso has been outdriving his team-mate (by analysis of laptimes) since the British GP.[LIST][*]British GP: Hamilton starts on pole, Alonso starts 3rd. Hamilton drops 2 positions to 3rd, while Alonso moves up to 2nd on faster laptimes.[*]Euro GP (Nurburgring): Incredible, and variably, wet conditions, but Alonso passes Massa in the last laps for victory, while Hamilton is unlucky & gets caught out, keeps the fire lit, but finishes at the back.[*]Hungarian GP: Alonso penalized & stays mired in traffic all day while Hamilton wins.[*]Turkey: Both McLarens start poorly, with Hamilton dropping 1 position off the grid, while Alonso falls back to 6th behind the Beemers. After Alonso gets past both Beemers and gains clear air, Alonso's laptimes are better than Hamilton's times. Unfortunately, Hamilton has a tire failure, costing him 2 positions.[*]Italy: First stint, Alonso heavier but Hamilton hangs ~1.5 behind him. 2nd stint, Alonso pulls 6 sec gap on Hamilton, and wins, w/Hamilton 2nd.[*]Belgium: 1st & 2nd stints, Alonso is faster than Hamilton, and pulls a safe gap to take podium behind faster Ferraris, while Hamilton follows in 4th.[/LIST]The way Alonso is driving now reminds me of his successful championship fights against Michael... He is very fast, consistent, and focused on winning the championship.
While there is no doubt that Hamilton is a phenomenon, Alonso has recently surpassed his younger team-mate in performance. They are an incredible pairing of team-mates, and a fabulous battle to watch.[/quote]
That's the God's honest truth there. The McLaren drivers could have been stripped of their points just as easily. Their team, their SPORTS team has been found guilty of industrial espionage. If the test driver knew, you can't deny that the team principal knew WELL before the allegations came to light. That's more than enough justification to remove a team from competition. It's only Bernie and the bunch's desire to actually have an F1 season that kept the silver cars on F1 courses this and next year.
This is the year of surprising and/or disappointing teammates. You could say that Alonso has outperformed his teammate, but not like a two time World Champion should have dominated a rookie teammate. The same goes for Kimi, has he done better than Massa? Sure, but he's not punishing him like everybody predicted would happen, there's only three races left and there's 7 points separating the "red car" drivers. I'd say that Felipe deserves a little more credit than everybody's given him in the past.
Everybody's hoping to find the "next Schumacher," it's not Fernando, and it's not Kimi either.
| NYEJ25 | 09-19-2007 02:41 PM |
Link to a good article on Pitpass: [url]http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=32875[/url]
I really hate Alonso and wish he would get fired already. He is such a selfish, arrogant prick. His sense of entitlement is bewildering at times. I can't understand how anyone could be a fan of his.
Edit:
If you haven't read the 115 page transcript from the proceedings last week, you should. It is a hell of a read and clearly shows why the FIA concluded that Mecca was covering up the level of infiltration the data had made into the team.
I really hate Alonso and wish he would get fired already. He is such a selfish, arrogant prick. His sense of entitlement is bewildering at times. I can't understand how anyone could be a fan of his.
Edit:
If you haven't read the 115 page transcript from the proceedings last week, you should. It is a hell of a read and clearly shows why the FIA concluded that Mecca was covering up the level of infiltration the data had made into the team.
| artkevin | 09-19-2007 03:51 PM |
I for one am a fan of Freddy's, less so since Hungary though. He is not infallible but he is a great driver and I guess I side with him on a lot of what other people call whining.
I will have to dig into the transcript though for the ruling.
I will have to dig into the transcript though for the ruling.
| tdm74 | 09-19-2007 03:52 PM |
Here is what Kimi thought about the incident at Spa
[url]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/url]
fuel to the fire. :devil:
[url]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/url]
fuel to the fire. :devil:
| chkltcow | 09-19-2007 04:34 PM |
[QUOTE=tdm74;19425938]Here is what Kimi thought about the incident at Spa
[url]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/url]
fuel to the fire. :devil:[/QUOTE]
Of course he won't have a problem with the WDC leader getting shuffled back a position and thus getting fewer points. HELLO!!
[url]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/url]
fuel to the fire. :devil:[/QUOTE]
Of course he won't have a problem with the WDC leader getting shuffled back a position and thus getting fewer points. HELLO!!
| richde | 09-19-2007 04:48 PM |
[quote=tdm74;19425938]Here is what Kimi thought about the incident at Spa
[URL]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/URL]
fuel to the fire. :devil:[/quote]
Hamilton will make a run directly at Massa at the start in Monza, straight line the chicane, but when HE gets run off the road........
[URL]http://www.grandprixmagazine.com/f1/F1-_Kimi_sides_with_Alonso_over_Hamilton_incident.shtml[/URL]
fuel to the fire. :devil:[/quote]
Hamilton will make a run directly at Massa at the start in Monza, straight line the chicane, but when HE gets run off the road........
| tdm74 | 09-19-2007 04:53 PM |
[QUOTE=chkltcow;19426605]Of course he won't have a problem with the WDC leader getting shuffled back a position and thus getting fewer points. HELLO!![/QUOTE]
THANNNNNNNNNKKKKKKK YOU!!!!!!!
THANNNNNNNNNKKKKKKK YOU!!!!!!!
| Wr4wrX | 09-19-2007 05:08 PM |
[QUOTE=NYEJ25;19424877] He is such a selfish, arrogant prick.[/QUOTE]
It's [I]almost [/I]a requirement to be a champion, e.g. Senna, Schumacher, and Alonso. Alphas just doing their thing on the racetrack.
Hamilton hasn't won a championship yet, but even though he has a polished PR veneer, he's shown his colors in Hungary, Monza, and Spa.
They drive people off the road, complain hypocritically about getting driven off the road, whine, throw tantrums, but drive the wheels of the car and win championships.
It's [I]almost [/I]a requirement to be a champion, e.g. Senna, Schumacher, and Alonso. Alphas just doing their thing on the racetrack.
Hamilton hasn't won a championship yet, but even though he has a polished PR veneer, he's shown his colors in Hungary, Monza, and Spa.
They drive people off the road, complain hypocritically about getting driven off the road, whine, throw tantrums, but drive the wheels of the car and win championships.
| NYEJ25 | 09-20-2007 09:52 AM |
[QUOTE=Wr4wrX;19427062]It's [I]almost [/I]a requirement to be a champion, e.g. Senna, Schumacher, and Alonso. Alphas just doing their thing on the racetrack.
Hamilton hasn't won a championship yet, but even though he has a polished PR veneer, he's shown his colors in Hungary, Monza, and Spa.
They drive people off the road, complain hypocritically about getting driven off the road, whine, throw tantrums, but drive the wheels of the car and win championships.[/QUOTE]
I agree to some extent. But Alonso is constantly waving his fist at people and taking poorly about people on his team. Just that fact that he refuses to talk to his boss because he is not being given sepcial treatment shows his true color. There is an enormous difference between being arrogant and cocky, and being a little cry baby. Alonso is the latter.
Hamilton hasn't won a championship yet, but even though he has a polished PR veneer, he's shown his colors in Hungary, Monza, and Spa.
They drive people off the road, complain hypocritically about getting driven off the road, whine, throw tantrums, but drive the wheels of the car and win championships.[/QUOTE]
I agree to some extent. But Alonso is constantly waving his fist at people and taking poorly about people on his team. Just that fact that he refuses to talk to his boss because he is not being given sepcial treatment shows his true color. There is an enormous difference between being arrogant and cocky, and being a little cry baby. Alonso is the latter.
| Wr4wrX | 09-20-2007 12:47 PM |
[QUOTE=NYEJ25;19433987]I agree to some extent. But Alonso is constantly waving his fist at people and taking poorly about people on his team. Just that fact that he refuses to talk to his boss because he is not being given sepcial treatment shows his true color. There is an enormous difference between being arrogant and cocky, and being a little cry baby. Alonso is the latter.[/QUOTE]
That's fair.
When I boil it down though, and not worry about the politics and off-track shenanigans, I just think Alonso is a massive talent. It took me a while to really appreciate his driving, but holding off Schumi in San Marino 2005 and Turkey 2006 must have been two of the most impressive drives I've seen. Then, Renault had to deal with all kinds of politics in 2006, like the mass damper issue and Alonso getting penalized for apparently holding up Massa in Monza qualies. Alonso came out swinging in the press and people thought the pressure had cracked him. Yet, he got in the car and got the job done.
Maybe it's because of this out-of-the-car/in-the-car contrast that he impresses me so much. That is, he whines in the media when under pressure, but drives balls to the wall when it counts. Perhaps though, it would be even more impressive if amidst all the controversy, Alonso kept his mouth shut and just took care of business. Either way, his driving does the talking for me.
That's fair.
When I boil it down though, and not worry about the politics and off-track shenanigans, I just think Alonso is a massive talent. It took me a while to really appreciate his driving, but holding off Schumi in San Marino 2005 and Turkey 2006 must have been two of the most impressive drives I've seen. Then, Renault had to deal with all kinds of politics in 2006, like the mass damper issue and Alonso getting penalized for apparently holding up Massa in Monza qualies. Alonso came out swinging in the press and people thought the pressure had cracked him. Yet, he got in the car and got the job done.
Maybe it's because of this out-of-the-car/in-the-car contrast that he impresses me so much. That is, he whines in the media when under pressure, but drives balls to the wall when it counts. Perhaps though, it would be even more impressive if amidst all the controversy, Alonso kept his mouth shut and just took care of business. Either way, his driving does the talking for me.
| soldmyboxster | 09-21-2007 06:02 AM |
Dunno if this has been posted, but it's the transcript of the hearing no September 13th, including portions which confidential information can be read.
[url]http://www.rtl.nl//sport/rtl_gp/components/formule1/nieuws/2007/09_september/images/wmsc-transcript-13-09-2007.pdf[/url]
Simply highlight the blacked-out text and paste into wordpad or notepad to read it.
It allows you to read about the Ferrari double master cylinder with a spring to gradually increase rear brake force, the use of CO2 on the car's tires, and McLaren's intent to push as much weight on the front of the car, including by lightening the transmission. Also what Mike Coughlin gets paid.
[url]http://www.rtl.nl//sport/rtl_gp/components/formule1/nieuws/2007/09_september/images/wmsc-transcript-13-09-2007.pdf[/url]
Simply highlight the blacked-out text and paste into wordpad or notepad to read it.
It allows you to read about the Ferrari double master cylinder with a spring to gradually increase rear brake force, the use of CO2 on the car's tires, and McLaren's intent to push as much weight on the front of the car, including by lightening the transmission. Also what Mike Coughlin gets paid.
| StuBeck | 09-21-2007 09:23 AM |
[QUOTE=richde;19421845]The lack of objectivity in some sports fan is disturbing, but hardly suprising.
Yes, how long after they obtained the documents did ole' Ronny give it up to the FIA. Mid March they started getting info from Stepney. That guy (Coughlan) should have been fired on the spot when he offered to pass along 700+ pages of another team's technical documents. That's what a honest person, or at least a dishonest person with a healthy fear of the FIA's draconian punishments, should do.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand where you are coming up with this. Dennis was told by Alonso in Hungry about info that Alonso knew of coming from another team. Dennis told Mosley immediately about it.
Dennis never gave the FIA any documents either, they were never in the possesion of anyone in McLaren but Coughlin, and he was fired when it came out what they had done.
The whole mess is dumb because all of the teams do it, they all know about setups from others but Ferrari just went retard strong and wanted to win at all costs. I am not saying that what happened should be allowed, but if everyone does it, one team out of 11 should not be punished.
Yes, how long after they obtained the documents did ole' Ronny give it up to the FIA. Mid March they started getting info from Stepney. That guy (Coughlan) should have been fired on the spot when he offered to pass along 700+ pages of another team's technical documents. That's what a honest person, or at least a dishonest person with a healthy fear of the FIA's draconian punishments, should do.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand where you are coming up with this. Dennis was told by Alonso in Hungry about info that Alonso knew of coming from another team. Dennis told Mosley immediately about it.
Dennis never gave the FIA any documents either, they were never in the possesion of anyone in McLaren but Coughlin, and he was fired when it came out what they had done.
The whole mess is dumb because all of the teams do it, they all know about setups from others but Ferrari just went retard strong and wanted to win at all costs. I am not saying that what happened should be allowed, but if everyone does it, one team out of 11 should not be punished.
| tdm74 | 09-21-2007 10:53 AM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck;19446350]I don't understand where you are coming up with this. Dennis was told by Alonso in Hungry about info that Alonso knew of coming from another team. Dennis told Mosley immediately about it.
Dennis never gave the FIA any documents either, they were never in the possesion of anyone in McLaren but Coughlin, and he was fired when it came out what they had done.
The whole mess is dumb because all of the teams do it, they all know about setups from others but Ferrari just went retard strong and wanted to win at all costs. I am not saying that what happened should be allowed, but if everyone does it, one team out of 11 should not be punished.[/QUOTE]
I agree about teams doing this.
Dennis never gave the FIA any documents either, they were never in the possesion of anyone in McLaren but Coughlin, and he was fired when it came out what they had done.
The whole mess is dumb because all of the teams do it, they all know about setups from others but Ferrari just went retard strong and wanted to win at all costs. I am not saying that what happened should be allowed, but if everyone does it, one team out of 11 should not be punished.[/QUOTE]
I agree about teams doing this.
| cdvma | 09-21-2007 12:54 PM |
[QUOTE=soldmyboxster;19445614]Dunno if this has been posted, but it's the transcript of the hearing no September 13th, including portions which confidential information can be read.
[url]http://www.rtl.nl//sport/rtl_gp/components/formule1/nieuws/2007/09_september/images/wmsc-transcript-13-09-2007.pdf[/url]
Simply highlight the blacked-out text and paste into wordpad or notepad to read it.
It allows you to read about the Ferrari double master cylinder with a spring to gradually increase rear brake force, the use of CO2 on the car's tires, and McLaren's intent to push as much weight on the front of the car, including by lightening the transmission. Also what Mike Coughlin gets paid.[/QUOTE]
LOL how many times in recent history has someone released a PDF with black stripes over the text that doesn't actually black it out? LOL. People never learn. Hillarious.
[url]http://www.rtl.nl//sport/rtl_gp/components/formule1/nieuws/2007/09_september/images/wmsc-transcript-13-09-2007.pdf[/url]
Simply highlight the blacked-out text and paste into wordpad or notepad to read it.
It allows you to read about the Ferrari double master cylinder with a spring to gradually increase rear brake force, the use of CO2 on the car's tires, and McLaren's intent to push as much weight on the front of the car, including by lightening the transmission. Also what Mike Coughlin gets paid.[/QUOTE]
LOL how many times in recent history has someone released a PDF with black stripes over the text that doesn't actually black it out? LOL. People never learn. Hillarious.
| KENisFISX | 09-22-2007 10:42 PM |
[QUOTE=Wr4wrX;19436227]...I just think Alonso is a massive talent. It took me a while to really appreciate his driving, but holding off Schumi in San Marino 2005 and Turkey 2006 must have been two of the most impressive drives I've seen. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, as I recall it, in 2005 when Alanso won his first F1 championship, Ferrari were running in the back field. Schumacher, M. was trying to compete with BMW for 6th or 7th most races. It was a sad season for Ferrari, they just didn't have the car to be a champion that year. That said, holding off Mikey Schumacher in your rookie year shows how much focus Alonso has in an F1 car.
2006 was another story. Schumacher should have retired in 05. He was past his prime and even past his post prime. To me a true champion is someone who can keep his fans happy and enjoy himself over such a long period of time. Wins come second to that(but are still important).
Yeah, as I recall it, in 2005 when Alanso won his first F1 championship, Ferrari were running in the back field. Schumacher, M. was trying to compete with BMW for 6th or 7th most races. It was a sad season for Ferrari, they just didn't have the car to be a champion that year. That said, holding off Mikey Schumacher in your rookie year shows how much focus Alonso has in an F1 car.
2006 was another story. Schumacher should have retired in 05. He was past his prime and even past his post prime. To me a true champion is someone who can keep his fans happy and enjoy himself over such a long period of time. Wins come second to that(but are still important).
| menash23 | 09-23-2007 02:08 AM |
[QUOTE=tdm74;19447137]I agree about teams doing this.[/QUOTE]
??? Teams have info but getting a complete book and documents from team insiders is not "everybody is doing it". That�s not the case, this case is about spying. You really think they didn�t take a look at the docs? You think they just fired the guy, and killed the files? If yes our naive.
Like in any business this info is gold and will always find use to benefit the completion.
Same case with the NFL 2 weeks ago, some things are allowed but some are just spying. You can steal signs, but not tape and decode the opposition. You can count cards, but not use any other thing.
In any case, if you�re caught you�re done. NFL, Vegas and F1.
??? Teams have info but getting a complete book and documents from team insiders is not "everybody is doing it". That�s not the case, this case is about spying. You really think they didn�t take a look at the docs? You think they just fired the guy, and killed the files? If yes our naive.
Like in any business this info is gold and will always find use to benefit the completion.
Same case with the NFL 2 weeks ago, some things are allowed but some are just spying. You can steal signs, but not tape and decode the opposition. You can count cards, but not use any other thing.
In any case, if you�re caught you�re done. NFL, Vegas and F1.
| Ferg | 09-23-2007 09:50 AM |
[QUOTE=KENisFISX;19461869]2006 was another story. Schumacher should have retired in 05. He was past his prime and even past his post prime. [/QUOTE]
His driving that season, especially towards the second half would want to argue this pont. Don't think that after four seasons of relative "cruising" and the throw away '05 and finally with a real fight on the cards that you didn't see Michael throwing everything he had into 2006. If anything he was at the peak of his powers.
[QUOTE=KENisFISX;19461869]That said, holding off Mikey Schumacher in your rookie year shows how much focus Alonso has in an F1 car.[/QUOTE]
The only holding off of Schumacher Fernando did during his rookie year was as a moving chicane. Alonso's rookie season was spent putting around in a Minardi.
His driving that season, especially towards the second half would want to argue this pont. Don't think that after four seasons of relative "cruising" and the throw away '05 and finally with a real fight on the cards that you didn't see Michael throwing everything he had into 2006. If anything he was at the peak of his powers.
[QUOTE=KENisFISX;19461869]That said, holding off Mikey Schumacher in your rookie year shows how much focus Alonso has in an F1 car.[/QUOTE]
The only holding off of Schumacher Fernando did during his rookie year was as a moving chicane. Alonso's rookie season was spent putting around in a Minardi.
| KENisFISX | 09-23-2007 11:40 AM |
[QUOTE=Ferg;19464301]His driving that season, especially towards the second half would want to argue this pont. Don't think that after four seasons of relative "cruising" and the throw away '05 and finally with a real fight on the cards that you didn't see Michael throwing everything he had into 2006. If anything he was at the peak of his powers.[/QUOTE]
That is my point, in 06, Schumacher's "giving it his all" wasn't an impressive show. Ferrari was more to blame as a whole, but there is no way you can say he was at the peak of his powers on 06. and then say this
[QUOTE=Ferg;19464301]The only holding off of Schumacher Fernando did during his rookie year was as a moving chicane. Alonso's rookie season was spent putting around in a Minardi.[/QUOTE]
I believe that's called blocking, and if you have a slightly slower or equal power car, then this is where the skill i was talking about comes into play. That is a good point, I guess it wouldn't have been his rookie year wouild it?
That is my point, in 06, Schumacher's "giving it his all" wasn't an impressive show. Ferrari was more to blame as a whole, but there is no way you can say he was at the peak of his powers on 06. and then say this
[QUOTE=Ferg;19464301]The only holding off of Schumacher Fernando did during his rookie year was as a moving chicane. Alonso's rookie season was spent putting around in a Minardi.[/QUOTE]
I believe that's called blocking, and if you have a slightly slower or equal power car, then this is where the skill i was talking about comes into play. That is a good point, I guess it wouldn't have been his rookie year wouild it?
| Ferg | 09-23-2007 12:05 PM |
[QUOTE=KENisFISX;19464759]That is my point, in 06, Schumacher's "giving it his all" wasn't an impressive show.[/QUOTE]
:huh:
Go watch Brazil again. In his last race he had the speed and the car to blitz the entire field. Had Schu not suffered the glitch in qualifying he would have started from pole and probably lapped everyone. His fastest race lap was a full 7 tenths faster than the next guy...who was driving the same car.
If you'd been with us the last couple of season you'd have seen I'm not the biggest Schumacher fan (swanky aqua sandals aside..) but even I have to give him credit for his fight right up until the end. How many of your "true champions" have spent their last season, well past their sell-by date, making up the numbers in mid fielders and tail enders?
:huh:
Go watch Brazil again. In his last race he had the speed and the car to blitz the entire field. Had Schu not suffered the glitch in qualifying he would have started from pole and probably lapped everyone. His fastest race lap was a full 7 tenths faster than the next guy...who was driving the same car.
If you'd been with us the last couple of season you'd have seen I'm not the biggest Schumacher fan (swanky aqua sandals aside..) but even I have to give him credit for his fight right up until the end. How many of your "true champions" have spent their last season, well past their sell-by date, making up the numbers in mid fielders and tail enders?
| Ferg | 09-23-2007 12:10 PM |
[QUOTE=KENisFISX;19464759]I believe that's called blocking, and if you have a slightly slower or equal power car, then this is where the skill i was talking about comes into play.[/QUOTE]
He was in a Minardi PS01, the only thing that car did well was block other cars. :lol:
I can't remember (Stu?) but I think the PS01 was another case of a resurrected Arrows chassis...
He was in a Minardi PS01, the only thing that car did well was block other cars. :lol:
I can't remember (Stu?) but I think the PS01 was another case of a resurrected Arrows chassis...
| artkevin | 09-23-2007 12:17 PM |
Schumi's drive in Monaco was stunning in 06 also. He brought it on himself with that boneheaded quali thing but on Sunday he was in a league of his own.
| StuBeck | 09-23-2007 12:32 PM |
[QUOTE=menash23;19463339]??? Teams have info but getting a complete book and documents from team insiders is not "everybody is doing it". That�s not the case, this case is about spying. You really think they didn�t take a look at the docs? You think they just fired the guy, and killed the files? If yes our naive.
Like in any business this info is gold and will always find use to benefit the completion.
Same case with the NFL 2 weeks ago, some things are allowed but some are just spying. You can steal signs, but not tape and decode the opposition. You can count cards, but not use any other thing.
In any case, if you�re caught you�re done. NFL, Vegas and F1.[/QUOTE]
The team never had the documents, one member of the team had them and kept them in his house. They were never in the team center.
Like in any business this info is gold and will always find use to benefit the completion.
Same case with the NFL 2 weeks ago, some things are allowed but some are just spying. You can steal signs, but not tape and decode the opposition. You can count cards, but not use any other thing.
In any case, if you�re caught you�re done. NFL, Vegas and F1.[/QUOTE]
The team never had the documents, one member of the team had them and kept them in his house. They were never in the team center.
| StuBeck | 09-23-2007 12:33 PM |
[QUOTE=artkevin;19464983]Schumi's drive in Monaco was stunning in 06 also. He brought it on himself with that boneheaded quali thing but on Sunday he was in a league of his own.[/QUOTE]
It was amazing, but he was helped a lot. A ton of people early on were just letting him through, he never had to try and pass them.
It was amazing, but he was helped a lot. A ton of people early on were just letting him through, he never had to try and pass them.
| Ferg | 09-23-2007 01:44 PM |
You have to ask yourselves, were Schumacher driving this season for Ferrari would the Championship already be academic?
| StuBeck | 09-23-2007 02:06 PM |
Probably not, him and Lewis would have had a few accidents, which of course would have been Lewis's fault.
| jdmgto | 09-23-2007 02:36 PM |
Speed needs to cbring backthe WRC.
| parker/slc/gc8fan | 09-23-2007 03:35 PM |
[QUOTE=StuBeck;19465687]Probably not, him and Lewis would have had a few accidents, which of course would have been Lewis's fault.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
These last few races will tell a lot about mclaren. So will the inspection of it's 08 car. I hope they can come back and trounce.
It's going to be interesting to see What happens with Alonso for 08 too.
Agreed.
These last few races will tell a lot about mclaren. So will the inspection of it's 08 car. I hope they can come back and trounce.
It's going to be interesting to see What happens with Alonso for 08 too.
| Dogbert2 | 09-24-2007 11:05 AM |
[QUOTE]
Speculation is rife that Fernando Alonso could be about to drop a bomb on the Formula One silly-season.
Felipe Massa was spotted by paddock observers meeting with Toyota officials at Spa Francorchamps, sparking rumours that he might need to vacate his Ferrari seat for 2008.
The tale ties in with fresh speculation that Jean Todt - whose son Nicolas manages Massa - is increasingly under pressure to keep his top job at Ferrari, and also Toyota's reluctance so far to confirm a team-mate for Jarno Trulli in 2008.
It has long been suggested that Alonso's most likely destination, if he leaves McLaren after a single unhappy season, is his former camp at Renault.
But the Ferrari gossip, raising the prospect of the Spaniard's pairing with Kimi Raikkonen next year, is now gathering strength, including in the pages of the British newspaper The Daily Mail.
"One stumbling block exists, however," the report read. "Would Ferrari be willing to buy out the remainder of Alonso's contract with McLaren, believed to be worth at least (US) $20 million?"[/QUOTE]
:eek:
Speculation is rife that Fernando Alonso could be about to drop a bomb on the Formula One silly-season.
Felipe Massa was spotted by paddock observers meeting with Toyota officials at Spa Francorchamps, sparking rumours that he might need to vacate his Ferrari seat for 2008.
The tale ties in with fresh speculation that Jean Todt - whose son Nicolas manages Massa - is increasingly under pressure to keep his top job at Ferrari, and also Toyota's reluctance so far to confirm a team-mate for Jarno Trulli in 2008.
It has long been suggested that Alonso's most likely destination, if he leaves McLaren after a single unhappy season, is his former camp at Renault.
But the Ferrari gossip, raising the prospect of the Spaniard's pairing with Kimi Raikkonen next year, is now gathering strength, including in the pages of the British newspaper The Daily Mail.
"One stumbling block exists, however," the report read. "Would Ferrari be willing to buy out the remainder of Alonso's contract with McLaren, believed to be worth at least (US) $20 million?"[/QUOTE]
:eek:
| TimStevens | 09-24-2007 11:09 AM |
whoa ... that would certainly make for an interesting season next year ...
So who moves in to McLaren? They going to re-sign DC for a swan song season? :D
So who moves in to McLaren? They going to re-sign DC for a swan song season? :D
| Ferg | 09-24-2007 11:09 AM |
That's a tasty little rumor. :D
<-[i]crosses fingers and wishes as hard as he can[/i]
So JPM back from NASCAR then?
<-[i]crosses fingers and wishes as hard as he can[/i]
So JPM back from NASCAR then?
| Wr4wrX | 09-24-2007 12:59 PM |
That'd be awesome to see Kimi and Alonso in the same team. However, if Alonso's complaining about having to race Lewis, it's hard to see him wanting to race Kimi.
[QUOTE=Ferg;19473734]So JPM back from NASCAR then?[/QUOTE]
Hope so! I miss JPM...and Connie.
[QUOTE=Ferg;19473734]So JPM back from NASCAR then?[/QUOTE]
Hope so! I miss JPM...and Connie.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét