Comments on: Top F1 figures to get licences following Briatore judgement?

By: VicWeir

VicWeir — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:36:19 +0000

You may be right about witness x’s means of acquiring the information before the race.
But, I didn’t think I’d said that two other members of the Renault team knew about the ‘crash’soon after the race – quite the opposite, that they were not RF1 team members, indeed you mention one of them yourself.
I believe it’s best always to base opinions on what you’ve actually seen and heard with your own eyes and ears; but in this case even that made us all look fools! Like many others,I saw the crash live and over and over again in re-play. I was quite convinced it was an accident.
I heard Piquet Jnr. deride the very idea that he had deliberately crashed. Wrong again.
We’re all ‘a bit hazy’ over this one, but in my first posting I was just voicing my feelings that it’s easy to say who should have said what from the outset when the responsiblity for bringing your entire team down is riding on it. Even people not part of the team didn’t jump at the opportunity to do so.

By: Jingjing

Jingjing — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 05:55:03 +0000

I don’t agree with that every one of all the teams to have a licence.The FIA must punish Renault team just like the Mclaren in the spygate while Renault punish someone in their team(such as Flavio and Nelson ) or Flavio chooses to leave.
You can’t say the crashgate is the fault of someone, it’s the fault of a team as a whole.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:48:22 +0000

Frankly, that’s just wrong!

Why?

The court ruled that the FIA could not act against Flavio as he was not a licence holder of any type. However, McLaren were an official licence holder, and so can be punished according to the FIA rules – and as such they can impose any fine that they wish on a competitor. It is much like football. FIFA can impose any rule that they see fit in order to regulate the sport, and this can include fines, bans etc.

By: Opposite Lock (Ken)

Opposite Lock (Ken) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:48:20 +0000

I thought witness X overheard the decision to commit the offense, but offered no opinion. Nor was he asked to give one, until the FIA deigned to investigate officially one year after they first heard about the event from Piquet Sr. Only then did witness X say that he knew about it, but was never a part of it. (Other than not reporting it or coming forward until questioned.) But then my memory may be a bit hazy about this as I didn’t know about the two other team members knowing…

By: Opposite Lock (Ken)

Opposite Lock (Ken) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:41:32 +0000

“The judgement said, ‘The FIA … can sanction licence holders.. members of the ASNs [national sporting authorities], but it cannot with respect to third parties, take measures equivalent to a sanction…’”

McLaren is a FIA licensed team in F1.–that’s the difference. Clearly according to the ruling the fine falls within the FIA’s jurisdiction and purview to levy a sanction, ie: pay this fine or be ineligible to continue to compete in F1.

By: Hugh Janus

Hugh Janus — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:56:27 +0000

FIFA can ban a member of a football team can’t they, so why Can’t the FIA?

By: The Limit

The Limit — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:01:46 +0000

@James.

Thankyou for answering my question. I find it interesting that Mosley’s ‘spat’ with Briatore has been labelled a ‘factor’ in this case.
Equally interesting when you realise that Mosley also had a long running feud with Ron Dennis which certainly played a big part in the 2007 scandal and Dennis’ decision to stand down last year.
The big difference for me is that Briatore has always had Bernie Ecclestone in his corner unlike Dennis. Yet again, Formula One’s image as a gentlemen’s club inwhich those in favour get the rub of the green has been laid bare for all to see.
It makes Kimi Raikkonen’s comments this last week, and those of Juan Montoya several years ago on F1, all the more relevant.

By: Howard Hughes

Howard Hughes — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:42:10 +0000

Pretty awesome article on Pitpass today by the only F1 writer to rival James – Christian Sylt… He opines that this overturning by the civil courts of an FIA judgement could actually open a floodgate of revisionary reversals, in particular, the £100m McLaren ‘spygate’ fine. Which could, in fact, bankrupt the FIA.

Oh joy, oh happy days.

By: Oliver Knight

Oliver Knight — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:28:59 +0000

why weren’t renualt, the licence holder, punished to anywhere near the level of mclaren? After all briatore was clearly with holding evidence just as ron dennies did and if anything the crashgate scandal was worse than spygate.

By: Tim Scarratt

Tim Scarratt — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:12:25 +0000

Yes and no.

Most of the reason behind Ari Vatanen’s popular support was the fact that Max had come out very publicly in favour of Jean Todt succeeding him, which led to widespread unease that Todt was seemingly being hand picked by the FIA in the face of what should have been seen as a free and fair election. If Max had kept his mouth shut and let the elections go on there’s have been no controversy over the process and Todt would probably have still got his landslide victory.

But of course, if Max had kept his mouth shut, he wouldn’t be Max, would he?