Renault race-fixing at Singapore 2008

[modbaraban]

modbaraban, what is the difference between what Neslon did and what Schumacher did in 94 and 97? Apart from the fact that Schumacher got another driver involved in his incidents? They could have been much worse, as with Nelson, could have been much worse but they werent.

I think MS's case was even worse. Much worse.

PS: back to the Renault case. Were they excluded from the results of the rigged race? It seems like the 1st logical thing to do, if a competitor found guilty.

[Scotracer]

Point is the FIA has massive blinkers and only remembers what has happened maybe 6 months prior to any judgement

[vall]

So... would it be alright if they used other words, like er 'very severe'? Would it stop you from creating topics in seizure? What's your point?

I guess his point is that in the past, behavious similar to NJ'js/Flav/Pat was accepted as normal way to achieve victory. After all AS taking Prost out was not less dangerous and it was clearly intended action.

[modbaraban]

Oh I got it. You're saying that because FIA didn't apply the rules a few times previously they should forget about doing so ever again. F**k the rules! Right?

Point is the FIA has massive blinkers and only remembers what has happened maybe 6 months prior to any judgement

But does that make Renault less guilty?

moderator(s) please merge this thread with the two other useless ones:
- viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7332
- viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7422

[astracrazy]

i wonder how this whole situation would effect the teams sponsorship?

Is this now ING's last season with the team? Surely the team will find it hard to find future title sponsorship?

I haven't read anywhere of any pre-signed deals?

[astracrazy]

PS: back to the Renault case. Were they excluded from the results of the rigged race? It seems like the 1st logical thing to do, if a competitor found guilty.

No they werent

[astracrazy]

with the evidence that was given to the WMSC i guess they have come up with the right verdict....

The only evidence available was the telemetry and NP's statement. Renault did not contest, in effect they admit culpability but not guilt.

In determining that such instructions should be applicable for an unlimited period, the World Motor Sport Council has had regard not only to the severity of the breach in which Mr. Briatore was complicit but also to his actions in continuing to deny his participation in the breach despite all the evidence."

What evidence and how can this be justice?

We may not know everything. I guess more and more things will come out of the woodwork now?

[Giblet]

Ayrton Senna openly admits to be prepared to take Alain Prost out before the race has started.

Once the lights go green, Senna duly delivers, and takes Prost out in a 150 mph shunt.

Senna is not repremanded for the incident, and becomes the world champion as a direct result of the pre-mediated crash.



Yet today, the WMSC have the face to say:

"The council considers Renault F1's breaches relating to the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix to be of unparalleled severity."



WHAT THE F**K ARE THEY SMOKING?!?!?!

He never admitted it at the time it was not until a tearful admission much later. The following year it at Suzuka actually. Also, keep in mind the year before it was the other way around, Prost turned into Senna when he went to pass, and tried to take them both out. It was this incident that made Senna think he was in the right for doing it back.

It was more a tit for tat thing, and the very late admission of guilt made was made all a bit too late. Besides, the FIA knew he was doing far more good for the sport than bad.

So yes, "Race Fixing", which is different than taking your teammate out. Senna was himself acting alone, if it was preplanned and and talked about it would have been a different story. Besides, where else would Schumi have learned to ram so well if Senna hadn't trailblazed the way

[i70q7m7ghw]

You can not condemn a team of 600 for the actions of 3 very stupid individuals.

They all came forwared and confessed the crime, it was proved no other member was involved, so why risk the jobs of many because of something they had no idea about until we all did!

This punishment is fair. Anything to induce Renault to leave would be bad.

How about disqualification from this years championship but allowing the team to still race? They could have even applied the same punishment they did for McLaren and just DSQ them from the WCC leaving the WDC standings intact.

What punishment is fair? They haven't been punished.

It seems if a team wants to avoid punishment in F1 they just need to threaten to leave and all will be forgiven!

[Chaparral]

Mack The Knife - spot on - you got it mate in one - they couldnt prove this either way - watch what happens down the track - its a kangaroo court thats decided this - incest springs to mind

[vall]

Oh I got it. You're saying that because FIA didn't apply the rules a few times previously they should forget about doing so ever again. F**k the rules! Right?

Point is the FIA has massive blinkers and only remembers what has happened maybe 6 months prior to any judgement

But does that make Renault less guilty?

well, it leaves the bitter taste that FIA applies the rules properly only when it fits its interests. Clearly they were after Flav, no doubt about that in my mind. And Renault being told that, took that appropriate actions to please FAI

[Rob W]

I have to agree, to punish the whole team would leave many people without a job, suppliers as well so it is the correct course of action I feel. Maybe force renault to pay back the money they won last year

This is without logic.

When Renault forgot Alonso's wheel nut a few races ago they got a fine...

When a car drives dangerously in the pit lane, they get a fine. etc etc.. which ultimately always comes out of the team budget and ultimately affects their ability to hire people or have after-work beers or whatever.

Yet it is suddenly unfair to punish a whole team in-case they have to lose some staff? They do it already - every time a sponsor leaves or their budget is cut they lay people off. That's how the business world basically works.

[Giblet]

They were after Flav, who had a history of cheating in the past. It's actually kind of understandable.

You cheat once with fuel filters, and you could claim it's a mistake and deny deny deny. Cheat twice, and actually fix a race, using cheating to actually _change the outcome_ for other drivers other than yourself is just without precedent.

His cheating cost someone other than himself a championship quite likely.

[Giblet]

I wonder if he will still be able to hold on to that model wife of his after this.

Is life returning to normal there now that the fookin' prawns have left?

[gcdugas]

OK, thats a perfectly valid point and I do agree in part. So why did the FIA punish innocent workers at McLaren?

Because Ronzo stayed on and denied Max his pound of flesh.