***Official 2010 F1 thread***

[stockhausen]

...
FIA to launch probe on '08 Singapore GP
...

... also http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8229787.stm

... last year's Singapore race [was] won by Renault's Fernando Alonso following a crash by his team-mate Nelson Piquet.

The incident triggered a safety car which put Alonso into the lead.

Piquet, who attributed the crash to a simple error ...

I have a vague recollection that a Señor Alonso was involved in some F1 skullduggery a few years ago; surely these two people cannot be in any way related? I think we should be told

 

[stockhausen]

There is a more detailed analysis including video clips and a track position by lap graph of this alleged conspiracy at http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/08/30/nelson-piquet-jnr-fernando-alonso-renault-conspiracy-claim/

Alonso, who along with Rosberg had started on the less favourable super-soft tyres, made his first pit stop [two laps earlier than expected incidentally]. Although he fell to last it proved extraordinarily fortunate timing when his team mate crashed two laps later, Nelson Piquet Jnr backing his car into the wall in front of the grandstands by the Marina.

Personally, I can't believe that Briatore would be that stupid and suspect that it is just the Piquet clan trying to cause trouble.

 

[therealnerd2]

There is a more detailed analysis including video clips and a track position by lap graph of this alleged conspiracy at http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/08/30/nelson-piquet-jnr-fernando-alonso-renault-conspiracy-claim/

I like this bit best:

Piquet also spun on the warm-up lap in Singapore. More evidence he was capable of spinning without being told to? Or was he getting in a practice spin ahead of his big moment?

Straws, clutching?

 

[mleanz1]

If this is true which i doubt then all involved should be kicked out of formula 1 and not allowed back!

 

[Glaucus]

If this is true which i doubt then all involved should be kicked out of formula 1 and not allowed back!

Different teams, different people, diffrent sponsors, different season.
IMO opinion once a season finishes that should be that. Go ahead and investigate if needed to change future rules. But there should be no come back.

 

[dannyjo22]

Of course there should be comeback if they can prove a team cheated. In this case I doubt they can but lets say by some miracle it did happen then the team should face a penalty of whatever sort they deem acceptable.

Just the same as they would strip an athlete of medals they should do the same with a team no matter if it was a couple of years ago.

So your saying if they found concrete evidence that say Lewis last year was actually using an illegal system that gave him a second per lap advantage he shouldn't be touched because it was last year?

If they have cheated and they get caught I don't care how many years they want to go back.

 

[Glaucus]

So your saying if they found concrete evidence that say Lewis last year was actually using an illegal system that gave him a second per lap advantage he shouldn't be touched because it was last year?

yes,
what happens if the team doesn't exist? or the team renames like brawn? Or the instigators aren't in the sport any more? Totally different sponsors?

where things change so much. If you aren't under investigation by the end of the season, then that should be that.

 

[stockhausen]

what happens if the team doesn't exist?

But the Renault F1 team does still exist as do Alonso & Briatore.

what happens if the team renames like brawn?

Renault is still called Renault; Alonso is still called Alonso & Briatore is still called Briatore.

what happens if the instigators aren't in the sport any more?

What happens if they are - if you can ever pin the blame on anyone specific, other than some long-term fall-guy.

what happens if [there are] Totally different sponsors?

So what? The team is the same. Maybe the sponsors wouldn't want to be associated with a crooked team?

 

[Kenai]

I think his point was more related to consistency than implying Renault had changed, which you seemed to have missed.

Would be a bit unfair on Renault to penalise them now (assuming this is all true) when another team, say, BAR/Honda would be much more difficult to penalise were similar to come of them. Say for example the fuel tank thing from a few years back, how would you handle if that only came to light now because Button (hypothetically) got angry with his team?

It's too much of a minefield to start punishing for things that happened in past seasons really, because a line needs to be drawn somewhere. The ending of a season is by far the most logical place to do that.

 

[dannyjo22]

I think his point was more related to consistency than implying Renault had changed, which you seemed to have missed.

If all parties have left all you can do is ask for the result to be changed from the history books and confirm parties X as cheats.

In this case the parties are still the same and if proved should spend some time on the sidelines.

 

[Glaucus]

consistency is key. it is done and dusted. It should not change this years racing and certainly should n ot change last years results.

And what happens if the team is not the same?
What would you want happen if Nelson was in a diffrent team. Punish that team as well?

As I said I have no problem in investigating it to change future rules. but there should 100% be no punishment. The history books will still say x-cheated in x-race and sponsors will still know and make up there own mind.

 

[stockhausen]

I think his point was more related to consistency than implying Renault had changed ...

If Renault, or Alonso, or Briatore can be shown to have cheated on some past occasion, they should be penalised. Simply saying that some team that is no longer in F1 cannot be penalised has nothing to do with teams that are still in F1.

I suspect that there was a wee bit of gambling on the outcome of the Singapore Grand Prix last year. I doubt that the relevant bookies would be too happy if the FIA were to be seen to be turning a blind eye to competitors who could be shown to have fixed the result of an event.

I accept that the chances of actually being able to prove anything are probably very remote and that Bernie and Max may well have a vested commercial interest in sweeping any past wrongdoing under the carpet, but arguments about consistency are most unlikely to be their chosen route


Do you believe that if you were to be pulled for drink driving or speeding or both, you would be able to avoid punishment by saying that if you had been killed you couldn't be punished?

 

[Glaucus]

Do you believe that if you were to be pulled for drink driving or speeding or both, you would be able to avoid punishment by saying that if you had been killed you couldn't be punished?

It's more like trying to be charged for speeding, when they didn't send the letter out within 28days.

It's not just if they left the sport. How about if people have simply changed teams. It is totally ridiculuse to dig up past championships. How about going back to the 80's or early 90's and start investigating them. Everyone knows everyone cheats as much as possible.where the gentlemens agreement gone.

 

[stockhausen]

It's not just if they left the sport.

Whatever; none of Renault, Alonso or Briatore has left F1.

How about if people have simply changed teams.

Which they haven't - yet. If a proven cheat is active in F1, he should be punished for any past misdemeanours if they come to light.

How about going back to the 80's or early 90's and start investigating them.

But we aren't talking about going back 20 or 30 years, we are talking about something that happened less than 12 months ago, involving a team, a driver and a team principal who are still involved in exactly the same capacity as they were at the time of the alleged cheating.

Everyone knows everyone [in F1] cheats as much as possible.

Now that I agree with

 

[Glaucus]

Whatever; none of Renault, Alonso or Briatore has left F1.

But that does not matter. Rules have to be made for a whole set of eventualities.

 

[Glaucus]

But we aren't talking about going back 20 or 30 years, we are talking about something that happened less than 12 months ago, involving a team, a driver and a team principal who are still involved in exactly the same capacity as they were at the time of the alleged cheating.

Where you draw the line?
12 months, 24? 240 months?

IMO it should several weeks after the season finishes.

 

[stockhausen]

But that does not matter. Rules have to be made for a whole set of eventualities.

Which particular FIA rule are you referring to here

 

[Glaucus]

Which particular FIA rule are you referring to here

any rule, should be applied consitently and with consistent punishments.

 

[stockhausen]

Where you draw the line?

If a proven cheat is active in F1, he should be punished for any past misdemeanours if they come to light.

Whatever, enough; I am sure that we will or will not hear more of this over the coming weeks.

 

[FrankJH]

the TEAM should be punished (sponsors are irrelevant, same team manager same team name then its effectively same team)

drivers should not (because 1st driver has no control over 2nd driver, its effectively a team order so team should be blamed)

If driver has moved since benefiting, you cannot penalise the other team - thats just plain wrong, but if he happens to be in the same team then so much the better.

Depending on how badly they cheated / how much they benefited it could just be scrapped from record books, and any future income upto the amount they won that year should be forfeited (from team championship winnings) so the penalty is felt by the team - as to whether they should have a penalty during the season its discovered.......that would have to be seriously looked into due to sponsor situation (if team is still able to race sponsors should be moderately happy with TV coverage even if they arent able to officially win due to penalty)

(I would just feel for the driver coming 2nd who would have won from the record books but wouldnt have had "his" / his teams day as it where)