| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Renault win appeal | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 17 2009, 04:09 PM (581 Views) | |
| sportsman | Aug 18 2009, 06:14 PM Post #16 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In 2007 Mclaren were fined $100 milion and stripped of their seasons WCC points,which are worth many millions of dollars. Their major crime was possesing confedential information about a rival team, namely Ferrari. Their fine was later reduced to $25 million. This year McLaren were given a three race suspended ban, after the Melbourne "lie gate" hearing. Neither of these two events endangered anyone's life,or could have caused anyone any injury. Renault, by their own admission, released a car from the pits knowing that the wheel was incorrectly fitted. And to compound the error, then failed to inform the driver to stop the car immediately. There is no way, that this punishment fit's the crime. |
![]() |
|
| Red Andy | Aug 19 2009, 12:43 PM Post #17 |
![]()
|
The key is the "knowing" part. As the FIA say: "In assessing the penalty which is appropriate in an individual case, great care must be taken not to equate potential danger with conscious wrong-doing." So the FIA conclude there is no evidence to suggest that Renault intentionally released Alonso without his wheel safely secured. If there had been intent (hence negligence), you can be sure the penalty would have been much higher. The original stewards' decision was a knee-jerk reaction to the events of the previous week. Now that the evidence has been fully considered, IMO the right decision has been made. And let's stop going on about Spygate. McLaren got off lightly for what was a massive breach of the rules as well as a criminal activity. |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | Aug 19 2009, 01:56 PM Post #18 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Er, I think you ought to take your own advice there. McLaren got what was coming to them, nuff said. Also, the criminal act (theft) was commited by Stepney, who was a Ferrari employee at the time. In addition, lets not forget that Renault got away with a near identical offense to McLaren based on a defense of "I can't remember, Guv. Honest" Now lets that be the end of it, before we all end up in a silly slagging match again. |
![]() |
|
| timmadigan | Aug 19 2009, 02:17 PM Post #19 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, we do Flood ![]() Yes, the commercial rights holders get their money no matter what - they get a flat fee to allow a city/site to host a race. BUT, if the ticket sales are down drastically and it seems to be a trend when you are missing a local or star driver/team, then you'll have a problem getting them to pay the same amount in future years and, more importantly, you'll have a problem getting new tracks/cities to pay the same amount without some guarantees on sales and/or revenue That's why Bernie, as the front for FOM, was lukewarm in his support for Max vs the manufacturers. He knew that if they lost the big names, fewer locations will want to host a race or be willing to pay the sums FOM wants. It's not Valencia today Bernie/FOM/CVC would be worrying about but Valencia, Monaco, India, Russia and other tomorrow. |
![]() |
|
| Kerri | Aug 19 2009, 10:27 PM Post #20 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't get it. ![]() It's all wrong.
|
![]() |
|
| Brave_Lee_Flea | Aug 19 2009, 10:32 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I love the way you are so so comfortable distorting the facts beyond all recognition...... astonishing. I mean, it's one thing to defend your team but that's just crazy. |
![]() |
|
| Kerri | Aug 19 2009, 10:40 PM Post #22 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Red Andy | Aug 20 2009, 08:42 AM Post #23 |
![]()
|
I was going to stay quiet as requested, but as Petra has jumped in so shall I.... Receiving stolen goods is a crime as well as theft. Furthermore, there is a massive difference between a few technical drawings taken from one team to another when an engineer transfers jobs, and having an on-demand supply of stolen information from a mole inside another team. |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | Aug 20 2009, 09:49 AM Post #24 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, you both have your opinions and I have mine and there is no need to get personal or throw around accusations. Lets not forget that the only reason that Renault didn't get any further accusations against them because Mclaren were "persuaded" to drop the case in rather convenient timing for the FIA to clear the 2008 McLaren to race. As much as I am accused of "distorting the facts", I feel that anyone that tries to differentiate between McLaren and other cases of spying are equally distorting the facts. The only reason that the McLaren case got so far is because a certain Fernando Alonso threatened to expose McLaren's activities, upon which Ron Dennis himself actually confessed to the FIA. It is rather naive to believe that no other team spies. It is common practice for teams to employ photographers to casually "stroll" the pitlane and paddock; Ferrari used to employ a guy to sit outside the Benetton pit and report all Benetton's strategy calls; teams further down the grid had full blueprints of the STR car which they submitted as evident of intellectual property breeches; and finally, in the Renault spying case, it was just a little more than a couple of drawings. Do you honestly believe that McLaren are so stupid as to bring a case like that did over a couple of drawings, like I sauid before the only difference between McLaren and Renault was the fact that McLaren (eventually) came clean (after Max's witch hunt, although he was somewhat right in this case) and Renault stayed tight lipped until McLaren dropped the case. I think the hypocracy shown in some of the comments on here is staggering, if McLaren does anything to displease, they are called evil and slated continuously and the case gets brought up at the slightest nudge, yet anyother team does anything wrong (including offenses very similar to McLaren's) and it gets conveniently forgotten within the month and anyone defending McLaren gets accused of "distorting the truth". I think it is time that some members on here really grew up. I don't ask anyone to agree with me but lets not start childish accusations over merely expressing an opinion. And before anyone has a go at me about Schumacher comments, it's not me that constantly brings up the Schumi/evil arguement (although I have been known to join in on going debates, but what is wrong with that). Anyway, end of rant. |
![]() |
|
| Brave_Lee_Flea | Aug 20 2009, 12:24 PM Post #25 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not naive. I have no doubt that spying is going on. However the differences between McLaren and Renault in this example are both the severity of the crime and the way they behaved once they were under investigation. I think you know that really. I admit that it probably wasn't worth such a big disparity in their relative sentences but it was worth far more than you seem prepared to recognise. And yes, you're right; I shouldn't have allowed my post to get personal. Apologies. But I also don't think you can throw stones and then demand that that "be the end of it". |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | Aug 20 2009, 01:30 PM Post #26 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What I'm saying is that it is unknown what the extent of renault's spying activities because the case was dropped, though admittedly probably less than what McLaren were accused of. In essence, McLaren got hit with a massive fine and lost any priviliage gained from their race performances throughout 2007, where as Renault got off scott free with out any sanction, even though further intensive investigation (as such was levelled at McLaren) could well have revealed serious breeches of the rules. Also, lets not forget that much of the McLaren issue was caused by a certain disgruntled Ferrari employee making the first approach, which certainly would have compounded any spying charges. Stepney could have approached any team and the result would have been the same. |
![]() |
|
| stradlin24 | Aug 20 2009, 01:33 PM Post #27 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
hmmmmm |
![]() |
|
| Rob | Aug 20 2009, 03:00 PM Post #28 |
![]() ![]()
|
Not wanting to dig up the same old arguments, I think one of the main differences between Renault and McLaren in their respective spying cases was the way each team handled it. Quite honestly McLaren did try to weasel out of looking bad at every turn. Denying they had any information, denying they used any information, saying it was ok to have it because it was given to them by a Ferrari employee, all of which is bunk. If Martin decided to give Williams McLaren's wind tunnel, I'm certain there would be a fuss when the trucks arrived to pick it up. Additionally McLaren's accusations levied at Renault while they may have been rescinded under pressure, I still think were greatly overstated. It really looked like a kid who was caught red handed narking on his little brother in hopes of getting one less spanking. |
![]() |
|
| Norbert | Aug 20 2009, 03:06 PM Post #29 |
![]() ![]()
|
I thought the difference was that when Renault found out someone had some McLaren data, they immediately went to the FIA about it, rather than actually try to use it for their own gain and then lie about the whole lot? Also, as I seem to recall, the extent of Renault's dodgy data was a basic schematic of McLaren's cooling system, not almost 800 pages of blueprints? |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | Aug 20 2009, 05:10 PM Post #30 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That is where you are wrong, Renault didn't go to the FIA, they just pleaded ignorance and that seemed to satisfy the FIA. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)










12:37 AM Jul 11