Associate
- Joined
- 18 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 106
I think what they got was totally to be expected. The guilty individuals have gone and this isn't the time to be handing out massive fines.
***Official 2010 F1 thread***
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
Not a 100million though I doubt. what a joke..
So why were McLaren penalised so heavily rather than the individuals responsible in that instance?
By who? The press? Scary but hardly the worst thing in the world. The FIA will just refuse to give any information to them regarding the case.
I do agree with you though
Like all things ....if it starts as a small pebble and rolls down a hill getting covered in snow as it goes down......could end up as an avalanche
(of course it could just as easily disappear into the echos of time as a whimper lol)
FIA will probably come up with some crock about Ron actuallly being forced out well after the verdict, whereas Flav and Symonds where forced out within a few days of "proof" coming to light.
After all Ron still has a lot to do with McLaren itself (albeit as I understand nothing to do with F1) - Flav and Symonds have already been fired and Renault accepted "guilty" verdict
(still think there is a VERY skewed logic to this arguement but I can see this being part of the reasoning)
Last edited:
Indeed - which is why the FIA ruling is acceptable, given the current circumstances.
Not at all. It is more important to be consistent. Under new rules here are loads of teams who wan in next year. They do not need Renault. It is a farce and a big one at that. If found guilty eh team should have been found guilty as well. Just like mclaren, just like BAR
Associate
- Joined
- 18 May 2007
- Posts
- 851
- Location
- Swansea
It all depends on how big a 'contribution' put towards the safety fund - and how that gets used.
McLaren was a little different in that they denied and defended throughout the case; Renault surrendered the guilty parties immediately. It strikes me as much closer to Liegate, than Spygate.
But I'm not going to put myself in the absurd position of claiming that the FIA are highly consistent. They're clearly not. However, in this case, I think they made the right call (as opposed to Spygate where they got it wrong).
2010 Calendar:
14/3 Bahrain
28/3 Australia - 5pm local start
04/4 Malaysia - 4pm local start
18/4 China
09/5 Spain
23/5 Monaco
30/5 Turkey
13/6 Canada*
27/6 Europe (Valencia)
11/7 Great Britain
25/7 Germany
01/8 Hungary
29/8 Belgium
12/9 Italy
26/9 Singapore - 8pm local start
03/10 Japan
17/10 Korea
31/10 Abu Dhabi - 5pm local start
14/11 Brazil
* Subject to the completion of contract negotiations with Formula One Management. If these are not completed then the Turkish Grand Prix will be moved to 6 June.
14/3 Bahrain
28/3 Australia - 5pm local start
04/4 Malaysia - 4pm local start
18/4 China
09/5 Spain
23/5 Monaco
30/5 Turkey
13/6 Canada*
27/6 Europe (Valencia)
11/7 Great Britain
25/7 Germany
01/8 Hungary
29/8 Belgium
12/9 Italy
26/9 Singapore - 8pm local start
03/10 Japan
17/10 Korea
31/10 Abu Dhabi - 5pm local start
14/11 Brazil
* Subject to the completion of contract negotiations with Formula One Management. If these are not completed then the Turkish Grand Prix will be moved to 6 June.
I'd much rather have Australia as the opener.
Oh and engine equalisation is back...
Following suggestions that there is a differential between the performance of engines used in Formula 1, the World Motor Sport Council has decided that should this be the case, and should the teams wish to eliminate this performance differential, they may be allowed to do so by reducing the performance of the more powerful engines. However, no engine upgrades will be allowed.
So instead of improving the worse engines, the better engines get worse. How are they working out the equalisation? Other than that, they're just going to be neutering the Mercedes engine.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 11,701
- Location
- Cheshire
Pretty big dent in his pocket there I would think!
Will dialling down a more powerful engine to bring it into line with the weak engines improve the reliability of the powerful engine? If the Mercedes get 500 rpm taken off their limit the reliability will be much better than the weak engine.
Propably, but reliability isn't an issue so it will hurt them more than they gain in reliability.
Hang on Flib, they are being consistent. Renault have access to McLaren technical data - no real punishment. Renault release a car out of the pits knowing that one of the wheels will fall off - no real punishment. Renault effectively force one of their drivers to crash so the other driver can win - no real punishment.
Renault International Assistance!
You seriously believe that Dennis and Whitmarsh did not know what was going on?
Both drivers did know what was going on, pit strategy was decided after getting word on what lap Ferrari planned to pit until Stepney was caught out and suspended by Ferrari.
Remember though that the McLaren fine came after a 2nd hearing where it was discovered that people hadn't been telling the whole truth the first time around?
Let's also not forget about the 700 or so people working for renault F1 who need the employment to keep a roof over their heads - how is it fair for them to potentially have their lives turned upside down because of a few bad apples at the top of the tree which have since been removed?
As for people going "well, this will just let any team know they can nominate a fall guy and get away with it", perhaps once, but try it a 2nd time and the suspended part of the sentence will be enforcec, the FIA would have no other choice.
Let's also not forget about the 700 or so people working for renault F1 who need the employment to keep a roof over their heads - how is it fair for them to potentially have their lives turned upside down because of a few bad apples at the top of the tree which have since been removed?
As for people going "well, this will just let any team know they can nominate a fall guy and get away with it", perhaps once, but try it a 2nd time and the suspended part of the sentence will be enforcec, the FIA would have no other choice.
![[TW]Taggart](/styles/overclockers/avatars/4.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 1,006
Id say Knowing about and using this data to test on the mclaren pretty clear that he was "complicit".
But then given Immunity By FIA to testify against his new employer, in a madmax headhunt for Ron Dennis' scalp... who wasnt involved!
Anyone is more than welcome to try and convince me otherwise. Still think I'm right.
Terribly ironic though. All that effort certain members on here have put into grand conspiracy theories involving the FIA and Ferrari, when it's Renault that have been getting off with cheating over and over and over.....
I feel terribly sorry for the guys in the factory and the pit garage, got to be awful working for a team that must have nudie photos of every single person even peripherally involved with the WMSC (after all, it's the only way they can possibly keep getting away with cheating).