The consequences of Thursday’s Renault-McLaren spy hearing (updated)

Posted on | Author Keith Collantine

Heikki Kovalainen, Renault, Istanbul, 2007 | Glenn Dunbar / LAT PhotographicThe most controversial season in memory drags on as the World Motor Sports Council waits to hear another enquiry into alleged spying tomorrow.

This could turn out to be an important moment for the sport particularly if Renault are found to be guilty of the same misdemeanour as McLaren.

It determine whether Fernando Alonso races in Formula 1 at all in 2008, whether Renault chooses to leave the sport, and whether F1 is to suffer another round of accusations of spying.

The consequences for Renault

What will Renault do if the FIA hit them with a McLaren-sized fine and penalty?

Many have suggested that Renault, being a major car manufacturer, would not wish to have its integrity attacked and so leave the sport. The team recently signed a new three-year deal with engine builder Mecachrome, so perhaps the team could be transferred to them?

Others suggest the FIA would avoid giving a manufacturer such a penalty in the first place, but I’m not convinced. Max Mosley had no qualms about throwing Toyota out of the World Rally Championship when they were caught cheating in the mid-1990s. And what did Toyota do? They came back to rallying after their ban, won the championship, and then set up an F1 team…

The consequences for Fernando Alonso

Fernando Alonso, McLaren-Mercedes, Monza, 2007, 2 | DaimlerHaving swiftly terminated his contract with McLaren following the end of the year Fernando Alonso was expect to return to his team of 2002-6, for at least one year as he is believed to have an agreement with Ferrari for 2009. The reason he hasn’t signed is believed to be because he is waiting to discover the outcome of the spying investigation which, ironically, was brought about by McLaren.

This hints at how seriously the matter is being taken by those in the know. Given the severity of McLaren’s punishment earlier this year Alonso must be genuinely concerned the team might suffer a debilitating fine, expulsion from the championship, or some other heavy punishment that leads it to leave F1 of its own volition.

The consequences for Giancarlo Fisichella, Heikki Kovalainen and Nelson Piquet Jnr

On the face of it, Alonso and Nelson Piquet Jnr seem the most likely contenders for Renault in 2008.

Fisichella is so confident of his future at the team he’s testing for Force India this week. But he may well be rooting for a (seemingly unlikely) scenario where Renault stays in F1 in 2008 but Alonso doesn’t join them, allowing the under-performing Fisichella to bag a fourth season with the team.

Kovalainen has already remarked that he would expect equal status at whatever team he drives for next year. Given Alonso vocal objection to that arrangement at McLaren this year, the two seem incompatible as team mates, despite how well they got on when Kovalainen was the Renault test driver in 2006.

The consequences for Red Bull

If Renault were thrown out of the 2008 championship, would they have to withdraw their engine supply to Red Bull?

Alternatively, others have suggested Red Bull as a home for Alonso should the Spaniard be unable to go to Renault. He would either swap with Mark Webber (who, like Alonso, is managed by Flavio Briatore) or David Coulthard – though the latter has loudly denied that could happen, and even suggested Alonso might go on sabbatical.

A further option might be Honda, presumably in Rubens Barrichello’s place, but new technical director Ross Brawn is very familiar with the Brazilian and has pledged his support.

The consequences for Formula 1

Giancarlo Fisichella, Renault, Sepang, 2007 | GEPA PhotographicWhatever comes out of the verdict, there will be uproar if Renault are believed to have committed similar action to McLaren, but receive a substantially different penalty.

Material leaked by McLaren recently has indicated that several Renault personnel were aware of the team’s possession of McLaren intellectual property.

No doubt this is only McLaren’s side of the story. But it is worth remembering that it was never shown whether McLaren gained an advantage through possession of Ferrari’s intellectual property, and presumably this is all Renault need to be found guilty of. As the verdict against McLaren in September read:

The WMSC…finds that a number of McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, or knew or should have known that other McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, highly confidential Ferrari technical information. In addition, the WMSC finds that there was an intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing. The evidence leads the WMSC to conclude that some degree of sporting advantage was obtained, though it may forever be impossible to quantify that advantage in concrete terms.

It seems likely that McLarens leaks so far have been aimed at putting people in the minds of these key points by which they were convicted earlier this year. But will the WMSC agree?

Update: McLaren today issued a press release (reproduced in full below) apparently at the FIA’s behest to correct various details about the case that had been reported earlier.

It seems McLaren’s charge against Renault has now been diluted to:
* Confidential information about the McLaren was copied onto a single Renault computer in September 2006.
* Nine employees saw it, two of which saw it on Phil Mackereth’s computer (including Mackereth).
* It constituted 18 technical drawings not 780 (it amounts to 762 pages when printed, but the 780 figure that many people thought was dodgy at first sight appears to have been so).
* The claim that Renault had an “entire technical blueprint of the 2006 and 2007 McLaren car” has become a “technical definition of the fundamental layout of the 2007 McLaren car and the technical details of its innovative and performance enhancing systems.”

Here’s the full statement from the McLaren website:

The FIA has asked us to correct certain factual errors contained in a press briefing given on our behalf by one journalist concerning Renault F1 and we are pleased to do so. The corrections are as follows.

In our briefing, we stated that there were 18 witness statements from Renault employees admitting that they had viewed McLaren confidential information.

To the extent that this implied that 18 different Renault employees admitted viewing McLaren confidential information it was inaccurate. 13 Renault F1 employees provided 18 witness statements and 9 of them have so far admitted they viewed and discussed the confidential technical information belonging to McLaren.

We stated that the confidential information on computer disks was uploaded onto 11 Renault computers.

This is not accurate. Mr Mackereth copied information onto 11 computer disks. The information on these 11 computer disks was uploaded by Renault IT staff in September 2006 onto Renault?s T: drive and then transferred by Mr Mackereth to his personal home directory stored on Renault’s network server. A back up copy of the material on Mr Mackereth?s personal directory was made onto an unknown number of Renault?s back up servers/tapes.

Our briefing could have been interpreted as suggesting that the Renault employees who admitted sight of McLaren Confidential Information all viewed it on computer screens.

Only Mr Mackereth and Mr Hardie admit viewing McLaren Confidential Information on Mr Mackereth?s computer. The other seven employees who have admitted seeing McLaren Confidential Information admit seeing it in the form of computer print outs or hard copy documents.

We said that the information on the 11 computer disks taken by Mr Mackereth included 780 individual drawings.

This was an error. The information taken by Mr Mackereth on floppy disks, in hard copy form and by email amounts to 762 pages when printed out. The 11 computer disks included 18 individual technical drawings. Mr Mackereth also admits that he took hard copy drawings of McLaren?s dampers.

We said that the McLaren information amounted to the “entire technical blueprint of the 2006 and 2007 McLaren car”.

This requires clarification. The position is that, the McLaren drawings plus the information in a confidential MP4 – 22A Specification document taken by Mr Mackereth constitute a technical definition of the fundamental layout of the 2007 McLaren car and the technical details of its innovative and performance enhancing systems.

We are pleased to assist the FIA in making the above clear in advance of tomorrow’s hearing.

Photos: Glenn Dunbar / LAT Photographic | Daimler | GEPA Photographic

More on F1’s spying cases

39 comments on “The consequences of Thursday’s Renault-McLaren spy hearing (updated)”

  1. darkblueturbo
    5th December 2007, 11:38

    ‘If’ they are found in the same position as McLaren was then the WMSC HAVE to apply the same penalty.
    From his comments at the time this is surely exactly what Briatore himself would expect!

    Renault will then cry about it and leave the series.

    Leaving the way open for Prodrive to buy them lock stock and barrel (at a reduced rate) and enter as a contructor of rebadged Renaults, with a double world champion (Fernando) and a future world champion (Heiki) as their pilots.

    OR… WMSC fearful of a major (potentially competitive, unlike Toyota and Honda) manufacturer leaving the series will back out and give some wishy-washy nonesense statement that lets them off scot free, or with a much reduced penalty.
    Mindful of the fact that as it’s off-season most of the F1 audience will be unaware of it and not too bothered and just sit down next year and carry on watching.

  2. The FIA are not exactly known for their consistency these days. I wouldn’t depend on precedent to determine what penalty Renault will get, or even whether they will be penalised (remember McLaren’s “cool fuel” appeal was rejected on the equivalent of not filling in the right form).

  3. What is to prevent the FIA doing exactly as they wish with the problem? Obviously, they don’t want to endanger Renault’s continuing participation in the sport so they will fudge the issue by declaring it entirely different from the McLaren case. Yes, there will be uproar over such a decision but when has the FIA had a problem with that? They’ll sit tight and let people think what they want, confident in the knowledge that they run the sport and no-one can tell them what to do.

    The worst of it is that, after Renault have been allowed to escape scot free, we can expect more crowing and jeering at McLaren from that prize buffoon, Flavio Briatore.

  4. McLaren penalty was so huge to be proportional to their budget – that is what FIA said. So Renault with smaller budget may escape with smaller penalty… FIA left the doors open for this …

    The other difference from FIA point of view may be, that McLaren would not leave F1 no matter what fine (unless joined by all other manufacturers in their doomed breakaway series). Renault however might and I doubt Max and FIA would want that at this moment …

  5. Actually the most recent figures available indicate Renault F1 Team’s turnover was higher than McLaren’s in 2005.

  6. well, than Max would have to find different excuse :-)

  7. I’ll wager that there will be some kind of legal loophole or procedural technicality that will see Renault escape scot-free from any wrongdoing whatsoever, whilst McLaren are punished for allowing an employee to take sensitive McLaren data to another team.

  8. “It seems likely that McLarens leaks so far have been aimed at putting people in the minds of these key points by which they were convicted earlier this year”

    And yet McLaren complained about leaks coming from Ferrari. Yet another example of McLaren’s double standards.

  9. Read all this legal gobbly-gook:

    The WMSC…finds that a number of McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, or knew or should have known that other McLaren employees or agents were in unauthorised possession of, highly confidential Ferrari technical information. In addition, the WMSC finds that there was an intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing. The evidence leads the WMSC to conclude that some degree of sporting advantage was obtained, though it may forever be impossible to quantify that advantage in concrete terms.

    and then consider one or more Michelin employees have joined Bridgestone. Is the WMSC or FIA now going to fine Bridgestone? Ban Bridgestone from 2008? You get the picture. This was not a spying case, McLaren didn’t plant a spy in Ferrari the data came to McLaren on it’s own. This happens everyday, a disgruntled employees takes data to his new employer, so what!
    There’s no evidence McLaren ever got to use the Ferrari data.
    The bottom line is McLaren were fined for “bringing disrepute on the sport” but the real truth is the FIA is guilty of that “crime”.

  10. Actually i don’t want Renault out of F1, but anything less than a fine is outrageous. There are slight diferences between both cases, but i still believe that, at the end, both are guilty and both employees are guilty. And Renault will be fined. Afterall they are guilty of using Mclaren 2006 data according to their crappy season.

  11. Keith

    Quick question. Those “spending” numbers are turnover. Is it clear that there is a link between spending and turnover (I mean there is some but how robust).

    Renault could have had a bigger turnover because they won the Drivers and Constructors championship, which not only guarantees more loot but attracts sponsors … it may be that because of this they ploughed more money into R&D.

    Anyway, it is immaterial. The fine should be weighted by turnover, not spending.

  12. Daniel PT is right, the cases are too similar to have different punishments. I don’t want Renault out of F1 either, as Flavio brings character to an often-dull paddock.

  13. I’m no Renault supporter, but I think we must remember the outcome of the first McLaren hearing which looked at the possession of the 780 page doc by their chief designer- they received no penalty.

    It was only after there was evidence discovered that members of the team were receiving live real-time info on pitstop strategies,technology, testing results etc. (ie. the existence of an active spy) that the verdict was reviewed and a severe penalty imposed. There was still some debate over whether they actually used the info, but common sense and the actual published testimony by driver Pedro DLR shows that at a minimum, there was intention to use the info “if it was useful”.

    The question is whether Renault’s infringement is similar to the first instance or the second. Seems more like the first, so for consistency with McLaren judgement – no penalty?

  14. If it is true that renault did have mcclaren information on various computers – then they should have an equal fine applied – if they did not then this should be thrown out and no further action taken – but people move jobs as more than one commentor has said and you cannot (apart from taking people out and literaly shooting them) stop them speaking.
    Its a mad situation that the fia has instigated on the world of racing put about by an envious team(ferrari) who could not undersand how a rookie driver was beating their cars and drivers – it had to be spying – he couldnt be that good – but he is that good and there is more to come from him – so get used to it ferrari!!

  15. after reading today’s retraction from mclaren, and their admission that pretty much everything they leaked about this case was complete bull, i’d say that renault will get away with a minor fine.

    mclaren, however may have to watch their back.

  16. Nice spot, thankyou, I’ve added the release above.

    I think it certainly drastically weakens the case against Renault. But I still don’t think McLaren were convicted of doing much more than what Renault are being accused of.

    It begs the question why Montezemolo is allowed to go around saying that the McLaren ‘had plenty of Ferrari in it’, which hasn’t been proven, and yet the FIA don’t demand that he issues a similar statement clarifying his position?

    It also begs the question what on earth McLaren were doing to over-play their hand so strongly in an ultimately useless PR war. They’ve just handed Max Mosley a stick to beat them with, which is criminally stupid.

  17. Heh. Next thing, it’ll be reduced to ‘some renault employees saw the floppy disks’… not what was on them, just the disks. With the McLaren logo on!

  18. powerline2007
    6th December 2007, 1:28

    We’ve to bear in mind that whatever the outcome of the FIA hearing, the door is open for Mclaren to take the FIA and/or Renault to a civil court. Max & the FIA are walking on a legal minefield here.

  19. “the door is open for Mclaren to take the FIA and/or Renault to a civil court. Max & the FIA are walking on a legal minefield here.”

    I’ve probably missed something, or not up to date, but how is that? I can understand Nigel Stepney being charged by the Italians, but thats not quite the same?

    I think, for PR reasons alone, McLaren couldn’t take it any further. Next thing you know fans’ll be burning McLaren flags at every race. Maybe even effigies.

  20. It looks like they can’t avoid punishment, the McLaren case is quite the same..a few ppl do stuff and your doomed… by the punishment against McLaren, the FIA made it possible for a few individuals to tear down a complete team!
    I still don’t believe McLaren used any of the Ferrari car… ok they might have know some stuff like strategie etc…but that’s quite normal in this world.
    But now, if someone comes in the team, shows some info… you’re done…
    Not a wise descision by the FIA!
    They needed some real hard proof, and those emails are just normal things!

  21. powerline2007
    6th December 2007, 4:14

    Loki, any legal decision by any organization, including the FIA, within the EU is subject to review by a civil court within the EU.

    By punishing Mclaren with a US$100 million fine & stripping them of the constructors points over a few emails, the FIA has set up a legal precedence it must uphold & maintain.

    If the present case with Renault is as bad or worse than the spying case with Mclaren & Ferrari, the FIA cannot issue a lesser punishment & penalty.

    Failing which, Mclaren are free to take Max & the FIA to a European court.

    The only recourse for Max may be to blackmail Mclaren by declaring that Ferrari’s IPs have been found on their 2008 car.

  22. Keith, you made a good point of McLaren being criminally stupid. That was their crime all this while. They have lost some face during all this and whatever achieved is questionable(if you think they achieved something, that is). Yep, flags and effigies it is then :P. Ron should just about start to sing “Burning down my house”.

    Now, FIA may hand Renault some punishment, that however, as people may like it or not, will be less stringent than McLaren’s. Why? McLaren were caught. Media, fans were all alleging Ferrari’s hand in “Maligning McLaren Campaign”, as the spygate was seen. FIA under immense pressure from all lobbies let McLaren scot free(in first hearing). Ferrari came up with the proof, went to FIA again, then got WMSC acting on that, which turned the tide. Renault, they however confessed. Guilty pleading will attract punishment to a lesser extent, well, somewhat. That’s what i think. Still, what do i know :P

  23. I think you’re right, Sri. Kinda like a plea bargain. The fact that McLaren’s leakages turned out to be pretty far from the truth will help Renault’s cause as well. On the political side, Flavio is closer to Bernie and Max than Ron has ever been (at least in the last decade or so).

    My guess: Renault will get a hefty fine, and maybe even a points penalty, but not a $100M fine and not a total disqualification.

  24. powerline2007
    6th December 2007, 7:10

    A media leak may earn a reprimand in a law court but will not amount to anything much unless it’s a sealed document.

    However, statements like this: “On the political side, Flavio is closer to Bernie and Max than Ron has ever been (at least in the last decade or so)” will be cannon fodder in an open civil court.

    For Max or Flavio to rely on conflict of interests in order to suppress legal due process will get themselves fried on criminal charges.

  25. My take on this, McLaren should have not said a tad more than was necessary. Ron was trying to get back at Max and FIA, which was apparent(no matter how vehemently anyone denies). It was going to only cause more trouble in future. Well, am not trying to justify the vindictive behaviour of Max or FIA. Only that if someone is a problem child(in this case McLaren), he/she won’t really be the dearest, is all am trying to say. So when they err, the stick is wielded, more often than not.

    Fairness, well, on that account, to be fair, McLaren should have been out, in the first hearing. It is however, the WMSC (who many pontificate as Ferrari’s life support)who not only let them compete(albeit without results), but, let the drivers continue unhindered. How was that fair to Kimi/Massa or any of the other remaining drivers? Funny, how i see people now talk about Renault being kicked out and all.

    Some fans are also, if i may say, quite rightly angry with McLaren and so are the sponsors. Infact, i wonder why the sponsors aren’t already leaving McLaren. Yes, they are fast and well may win races this season as well. Yet, i’d think that nobody wants additional baggage what McLaren have had in the year 2007 with all the controversies and now going into 2008(it’s starting to look bleak). God save the queen, sorry, erm… i meant Ron!

  26. Hi powerline!

    Of course, the political closeness of Flavio, Max, and Bernie will never be said in public. It’s treated more like an open secret, but no one can really prove it. Since it cannot be proven, it cannot be used in any court.

    Max is knowledgeable in law and he’d make sure he wouldn’t get caught in that kind of trap. On the contrary, they’ll look for a big enough loophole to get through (mostly) unscathed.

  27. flav has responded to the climbdown by mclaren:

    “A lot of very bad things have been said about us by McLaren in the last few weeks, very damaging.”

    “We will be cleared and once the verdict is announced we will consider legal action. Our reputation has been defamed.”

    fighting talk indeed. more here:

    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/27426/Briatore-warns-McLaren-they-face-a-backlash

  28. Briatore must be confident things are going to go his way today. Given how badly McLaren have handled things so far I don’t blame him.

  29. I only wish that they could like school-kids in a playground sort this in a respectable manner :D . Wait, they already are. Come on, this ain’t going to get us/them anywhere, which is apparent. Renault, McLaren should just now let sleeping dogs lie, after the verdict and perhaps let the racing on the tracks speak. That i’d think is in the best interests of everyone.

  30. Maybe a cockfight would not be out of place, any bets on who could pack a lethal punch? Ron or would it be Flavio?

  31. No contest! I’ve never seen either taking a slug, but who’s weight would you really rather not have behind a fist???

    I wonder if this is going to be another time when we will be kept waiting for the verdict?

  32. OK here we go:

    McLaren have now clarified that a few less people signed statements – 9 vs 18

    McLaren have now confirmed that it was not uploaded to 11 computers, but 11 DISKS were uploaded to the renault computer network

    McLaren state that 762 pages of documentation was taken, not 782 drawings

    So it seems to me that all that has happened is that McLaren have clarified some details. There is no climbdown here, the effect is the same. Renaultt staff have signed statements saying that they have viewed the documents and that the data was uplaoded onto the Renault systems. This is significantly more evidence than was raised at the McLaren hearing.

    If Renault don’t get a $100 fine, and don’t have their points from the 2007 season removed then the FIA have proved themselves to be Foolish.Incompetent.Asses.

  33. Loki, i have no clue. I have seen none of them personally slugging it out. Their drivers, well they are a different lot. Senna, Montoya, Schumacher etc. For once, i thought, they have stooped low enough already. Well, why not make it a lil’ amusing for us paying viewers :P.

    And yes, no verdict till now. Looks like another one of those days!

  34. bernie's nemesis
    6th December 2007, 17:52

    “If Renault don’t get a $100 fine, and don’t have their points from the 2007 season removed then the FIA have proved themselves to be Foolish.Incompetent.Asses.”

    Absolutely. But I think they’ve already done that, via Max’s statement about his relationship with Luca D.
    The Head of a sporting governing body is being very foolish by admitting a biased relationship with the 2 current leading contenders.

    Inflammatory statements made by Ferrari that have remained unproven- Luca D “There is a lot of Ferrari in that car”, went unpunished and that also doesn’t help.
    The FIA required clarification about Mclarens initial claims.

    I am sceptical that Max will punish Bernies new buisness partner too heavily either, as that could create political uneasiness in the F1 world. It’s all just a bit too old school network (that Ron has never been invited into).

    If Flav gets his way, and sues for defamation, it really looks like Mclaren will get punished for the same thing that Ferrari and the FIA charged them with.

    The FIA can have no grounds for not fining Renault a similar amount. The fear that Renault may leave if fined too much is just throwing toys from the pram on the grandest scale.

    The whole thing is starting to smell really bad….

  35. This spying malarkey is turning sour, and is threatening to swallow up F1. If Renault are found guilty then the FIA need to ensure that F1 is transparent from now on, that everything is monitored and that things that need to be kept secret STAY secret. Otherwise we’re not going to have a sport in 18 months time.

  36. Well they got away with it – anybody can have their competitors info on their computers get found guilty but will not be punished – on this basis – McClaren can take the fia to the european court of justice – basis – inequal punishment for a industrial crime – any court/governing body must on each case show a even handed approach to any perceived demeanor by its members – you couldnt have one member being blackballed by his club for pinching the secretary’s bum and the person who did the same later get a smile and an approving wink – discrimination at the worst level i’m afraid – that my bit over for now

  37. I guess we’ll find out what the justification is from the FIA tomorrow . . . although this is turning out much the same as the McLaren case isn’t it – first found guilty but no penalty.

    So how much longer is this one going to ensue.

  38. “… although this is turning out much the same as the McLaren case isn’t it – first found guilty but no penalty.”

    And do any of us recall the howls of outrage from Ferrari AND that pompous ass Flava-Flav when no punishment were meted out to McLaren? No justice no peace!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.