- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
And in this case consultant meaning basically the technical director.scuderiafan wrote:He was banned from F1 for 5 years, and will return in 2013. In the meantime, he is allowed to be a consultant to the team.
So it was purely Piquet's decision to crash?xpensive wrote:I still believe both Symonds and Briatore were innocent, just victims of a political fight within the FIA.
Im kind of with xpensive here. Way i saw it was that certain members within the FIA wanted Pat and Flavio gone. Its just that Piquet, a man who didn't want his name being muddied for being 'slow' or a poor driver. I believe (the rumours at the time) that Renault offered him a spell in a lower down car and then to come back to the team after half a season with that team. The rumours in 2009 were that they were to seat him in Bourdais Toro Rosso STR4 at Hungary and for the rest of the 2009 season, and for Renault to seat Bourdais or Senna in the R29, however Bourdais had a clause that if he left STR he would have to not compete for any other for the rest of that season, Senna was tied to a non release contract with Oreca LMP1 team. They took Grosjean as the 3rd choice as Flavio and Pat wanted an experienced head alongside Alonso for the rest of the year.Max Speed wrote:So it was purely Piquet's decision to crash?xpensive wrote:I still believe both Symonds and Briatore were innocent, just victims of a political fight within the FIA.
'Briatore' and 'innocent' in the same sentense. I see what you did there.xpensive wrote:I still believe both Symonds and Briatore were innocent, just victims of a political fight within the FIA.
Yes, ok, who knows what went on, BUT......I was talking about Piquet throwing the Renault into the wall intentionally. An insult to the memory of all the drivers and spectators who have been killed or injures in ACCIDENTS over the years - it was SOMEBODY'S decision to do this, possibly all three (Briatore, Symonds, Piquet), and, if that was the case, none of them deserve to be employed in Motor Sport, in any shape or form, againESPImperium wrote:Im kind of with xpensive here. Way i saw it was that certain members within the FIA wanted Pat and Flavio gone. Its just that Piquet, a man who didn't want his name being muddied for being 'slow' or a poor driver. I believe (the rumours at the time) that Renault offered him a spell in a lower down car and then to come back to the team after half a season with that team. The rumours in 2009 were that they were to seat him in Bourdais Toro Rosso STR4 at Hungary and for the rest of the 2009 season, and for Renault to seat Bourdais or Senna in the R29, however Bourdais had a clause that if he left STR he would have to not compete for any other for the rest of that season, Senna was tied to a non release contract with Oreca LMP1 team. They took Grosjean as the 3rd choice as Flavio and Pat wanted an experienced head alongside Alonso for the rest of the year.Max Speed wrote:So it was purely Piquet's decision to crash?xpensive wrote:I still believe both Symonds and Briatore were innocent, just victims of a political fight within the FIA.
Even in 2008 Flavio wanted Piquet gone seemingly, he wanted him replaced after 8 GP by Coulthard so that Red Bull could put Vettel in the Red Bull RB4 and then put Buemi in the STR3. It was offered to Red Bull, but the only sticking point was that Piquet had a contract that gave him a certain amount of starts with the team, and that was 18 races that season.
I think that Pat and Flavio were stitched up as they were outspoken at that time against certain people in the FIA and FOM who wanted them out the way. Flavio was wanting the teams to gain shares in CVC/FOM at the time, and Pat was wanting certain technical changes to the 2010 regulations.
It was a stitch up to me, i have no evidence to back me up, but i am allowed my own opinions.