A visious and vendictive vendetta

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: 11 Apr 2004, 23:29
Location: London, England, UK

Post

I'm going to venture a controvertial idea:

The punishment given to Renault is right, exactly right, 100% even. Spying goes on in F1 all the time.

HOWEVER, the punishment given to Renault, in light of previous punishment given to teams (Mclaren) for similar acts is simply not consistent and therefore totally wrong.

What I'm getting at is that the punishment gven to Renault is right, they spied, big deal it happens, slap them on the wrists, maybe check their 2008 car or something. Whatever. This should have happened to Mclaren, but insted they got a huge fine, lost championship points and all the problems that come with that. As a result, whether Mclaren deserved a bigger punishment to Renault or not, the pnishment given to Renault is not only not consistent but HUGELY disproportional.

The FIA have dug themselves a hole, they wanted to make an example of the high profile Mclaren-Ferrari case, but then when it comes to other teams thety realise they just can't fine everybody huge sums of money...people wont watch the sport anymore if they do. As a result they feel they can't punish Renault so severly, and then they end up loosing credibilty and looking like a bunch of clowns.

I'm sorry but if the FIA cannot govern with consistency then there is plainly something wrong, and the governing body is currently not fit for purpose.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

MrT
MrT
1
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 11:32

Post

IMO:
There's so much speculation at present - Something is clearly amiss. However I am fully aware that the media and us almost certainly don't have the full story.

I am a Mclaren Fan and could never work out there punishment because I always thought Ferrari was partly to blame due to their own poor house keeping skills with Stepney. However I fully accept I don't know the full story so I have an open mind that the punishment may have been correct. However the reasons and evidcence madce public by the FIA to me didn't stack up.... Then comes along the Renault case, which is undeniably a similar case... (I found it funny they got hold of the J damper designs and didn;t even understand how it worked properly) and the FIA has seemed inconsistent with the punishment given the evidence presented.... I have to admit I think something is up with the FIA at the moment and wish the GPMA went ahead.....

This all leaves me, after devoting years to racing, and studying for a career in the sport, loosing the will to support a sport run by a non-transparent governing body. It's back to grass roots motorsport for me....

Belatti
33
Joined: 10 Jul 2007, 21:48
Location: Argentina

Post

If FIA punished Renault (with money and 2008 championship points) there was a probability of Alonso doing nothing in 2008. Imagine millions of F1 fans doing what Manchild says he did (but he didnt) that is stop watching F1. That was not good for them.

There is a solution, not everything is lost: return the 100 million and the points and give McLaren the WCC.
"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." -Juan Manuel Fangio

"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication and competence." -Ayrton Senna

User avatar
checkered
0
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 14:32

Post

Spencifer, you idea is

far from controversial. It's all the rage, it's almost the norm with those who see themselves as coming to McLaren's rescue. However, it's taking a sledgehammer to a problem that could be resolved with a spanner. Don't take the FIA for fools. They're human and can err (as I suspect their legal case against Brundle might turn out to prove), but whether their (or certain members' of theirs) motivation was neutral or not, they wouldn't have acted the way they did had they thought their position was indefensible, untenable or weak.

You're disregarding obvious differences between Renault/McLaren and Ferrari/McLaren. There is a perfectly solid case to make that the teams' treatment, where comparable, was entirely consistent. The FIA is made up of many more people than the WMSC or the president, most of whom work in good faith and for the love of motorsport. Your argument, if it's to be taken as a central one in seeking change, can only be pursued through means that risk the whole organisation and not only the people responsible for the outcomes of recent events.

Whether it's time for such a drastic action, essentially to "absolve" one team while framing it as an altruistic action - well, at least you'd better know exactly what you're doing. You'd better be sincerely altruistic than just appear so. And you've got to get your facts straight as well. Your argument as to why and how McLaren might've been mistreated has to be entirely defensible, if not for anything else than for the general good of the sport. Two wrongs don't make a right.

The mistreatment argument might carry some merit, but it has less to do with Renault than other aspects, that's my perception. And if you truly want change, McLaren must merely be a footnote in a much more comprehensive argument. Not a rant about the past, but preferrably a vision for the future as well. You may even find that the people you want to remove want a honorable way out and providing one can resolve the issue. It might be a tad distasteful but constructive. Choose your battles.

bettonracing
1
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 15:57

Post

Belatti wrote: There is a solution, not everything is lost: return the 100 million and the points and give McLaren the WCC.
Assuming the Hungarian GP penalty of no WCC points (a loss of 15points total) was still in effect, and that Mclaren was allowed to score points at all other races in 2007, it was calculated that Mclaren would have finished the season with 203pts (218 minus 15) to Ferrari's 204.

The argument then becomes one of whether the Hungarian penalty was appropriate or not...

(One could also argue that the mental anguish after the FIA's meddling caused Mclaren to lose concentration - and thus points.)

Spencifer_Murphy wrote:... HOWEVER, the punishment given to Renault, in light of previous punishment given to teams (Mclaren) for similar acts is simply not consistent and therefore totally wrong.

What I'm getting at is that the punishment gven to Renault is right, they spied, big deal it happens, slap them on the wrists, maybe check their 2008 car or something. Whatever. This should have happened to Mclaren, but insted they got a huge fine, lost championship points and all the problems that come with that. As a result, whether Mclaren deserved a bigger punishment to Renault or not, the pnishment given to Renault is not only not consistent but HUGELY disproportional. ...
I seem to be missing some information. I was under the impression that Mclaren was punished for the 'development data' (pit strategies, fuel loads, etc) which is established CAN alter the outcome to the race (see my first post in this thread) whereas the 'design data' is what both Mclaren and Renault were guilty of, but no conclusive evidence was found to prove that either of them had copied the designs.

For the FIA to scrutinize the MP4-22 (due to them having design data) and not the R28 (who also had design data, although presumably nothing useful to the 2008 regulations) seems somewhat biased, although it can be argued that the data Mclaren had access to was more applicable to design of a current/ future F1 car than the info Renault had access to.

Is there something I'm misunderstanding?

Kurt

Disclaimer: Please note that I'm not out to justify the FIA's decisions or penalties in these cases but to either clear up the misinformation or understand the information more completely myself.