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

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

Advert | Go Ad-free

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

  1. 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?

  2. nellyweb said on 6th December 2007, 11:09

    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.

  3. 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!

  4. bernie's nemesis said on 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….

  5. Vertigo said on 6th December 2007, 18:01

    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.

  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. What a joke!

  9. “… 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!

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published.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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.