Comments on: ‘McLaren witch hunt’ discussed at second spy hearing

By: Bob H

Bob H — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:50:35 +0000

Max needs to aggressivly respond to Brundle’s ‘witch hunt’ story as otherwise the EU would have a justification to revisit the terms underwhich it allows the FIA to operate in Europe. In Max’s comments above about this it is clear he was trying to get Mills to confirm if this was formal complaint by Maclaren. Brundle and the Times are now literally between a rock and a hard place, the FIA and EU.

By: Peter

Peter — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:53:48 +0000

McLaren apologised to the FIA, maybe other people need to reflect their perception of the FIA now as well?

By: Dan M

Dan M — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:23:06 +0000

Ad another chapter to that book he wants to write…

By: milos

milos — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:27:19 +0000

Reading the excerpt you are showing above and recalling the whole performance of the McLaren lawyer I feel he was totally unprepared for what was waiting for him…

It is probably not easy to face Mad Max but he should have known better …

“I still think it’s odd none of the major news outlets reported on the FIA’s gigantic faux pas when it issued the original version of the September 13th transcripts with sensitive McLaren and Ferrari data that was supposed to be censored left visible.”

It definitelly is… I remember one website reporting on it (not sure which one) but without much comment and only about a week after it first came out (on this blog )

By: Alistair

Alistair — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:06:35 +0000

I would say yes it is a witch hunt unless anyone can add further to the balance of information about the Mclaren & Renault spying :
On the Mclaren side there was a presumption of guilt, Renault presumed innocent.
Mclaren: no Ferrari docs found on computers or high level reviews of technical information reviewed, Renault: information on computers with high level reviews and J-damper simulations. Other information available but not on Renault computers was presumed not to have been used, but on Mclaren’s side FIA presumed use of all information.
The further information Mclaren used in the form of emails was published as superficial (tyre pressures etc not detailed technical design?) and was used as the basis of $100 fine etc.
The FIA should be more PR aware and say (if true) that Ferrari designs (naming them) have been designed in whose origins can be proven to be Ferrari and that the route to these designs being obtained is through the dossier and months of detailed correspondence to fully understand functionality. It must be pointed out that an engineer with designs which are limited by the elimination of other competitor’s designs will have a ‘performance advantage’
In an ironic way spying is healthy for the sport, if it serves to equalise the performance more, and not found out, a wider spread of drivers should be more competitive.
On a final note, if the FIA are to adjudicate with impartiality, given the interests & friendships would they, as a jury be suitable – I think not.

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 12:06:09 +0000

As for the more serious accusation, plainly Max Mosely was feeling very sensitive – I wonder if Brundle’s column four days before the hearing had any bearing on this sensitivity? – it is clear that the FIA refused to handle any matter relating to the fairness of the WMSC. Hence why it is open to accusations of unfairness. It is also clear that nobody had briefed the McLaren lawyer about what to do with the “witch-hunt” line of argument, which is really strange too.

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:52:20 +0000

There’s supposed to be transcripts – I wonder if Max is hoping that the controversy will die down before he publishes them. Or maybe he’s briefing this transcript publisher that he/she is meant to publish the version WITHOUT the confidential technical information!

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:33:20 +0000

No nothing yet, I’ve only got round to re-filling the printer after the battering it took with the other two transcripts. All those big black censorship marks didn’t help…

By: Vittorio84

Vittorio84 — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:27:44 +0000

That’s a strange affair

By: sidepodcast.com

sidepodcast.com — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:55 +0000

any sign of the transcripts from the renault hearing yet?

the mclaren ones appeared a few days after the meeting in paris. seems oddly quiet this time around.