Nelson Piquet Jnr, Renault, Singapore, 2008

Renault face Singapore crash hearing

2009 F1 seasonPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

The FIA put out a short media release late this afternoon confirming Renault are being called to answer charges that they deliberately caused a crash to help Fernando Alonso win the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

The statement read:

Representatives of ING Renault F1 have been requested to appear before an extraordinary meeting of the FIA World Motor Sport Council in Paris on Monday, 21 September 2009.

The team representatives have been called to answer charges, including a breach of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code, that the team conspired with its driver, Nelson Piquet Jnr, to cause a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix with the aim of causing the deployment of the safety car to the advantage of its other driver, Fernando Alonso.

Rumours about the investigation first came to light over the Belgian Grand Prix weekend.

Renault is being investigated under the now-infamous article 151c, which concerns bringing the sport into disrepute. It’s the same charge McLaren were found guilty of in 2007 (for obtaining Ferrari intellectual property) and earlier this year (for misleading the Australian Grand Prix stewards).

In 2007 Renault were found to have broken article 151c in another spying inquiry, but no penalty was imposed because, as the verdict read, of a “lack of evidence that the championship has been affected.”

Felipe Massa may rue that Piquet’s crash led to a safety car period during which his race was ruined, costing him vital championship points.

If Alonso’s win were retrospectively taken from him, Nico Rosberg would inherit his maiden victory. But even if the points were redistributed it would not change the identities of Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari as the drivers’ and constructors’ champions.

But how the crash affected the world championship is likely to be of less interest to the panel than the matter of safety. It almost goes without saying that causing a deliberate crash puts drivers, marshals and fans at risk – something the FIA may be extremely sensitive to given recent serious accidents in F1 and F2.

If Renault are found guilty, expect the World Motor Sports Council to press for a very severe penalty.

Renault will go before the World Motor Sports Council on September 21st. Funny how the story came out last thing on a Friday, just as we expected, isn’t it?

The Renault Singapore controversy

142 comments on “Renault face Singapore crash hearing”

  1. SOunds really demented, but I wonder if there was some spread betting sindicate on PK spins, and on what laps. Did’nt they send him out on slicks at Monaco, with predictable results?

  2. Surely they wouldn’t summon Renault if there wasn’t any substance to the accusations.

    I hope Alonso gets punished or thrown out of F1 because he MUST have been in on it (if it turns out to be true). He seems to have not been mentioned in all of this, but knowing how forceful he is in the team, if they told him to pit on lap 12, he would have protested unless he knew why. Wouldn’t surprise if it was all true … but we will see.

    1. “if they told him to pit on lap 12, he would have protested unless he knew why.”

      Pat Symonds actually came out after the race and said that the logic of putting Alonso on such a super-aggressive strategy was not that it was a better strategy when compared with alternatives, but it was one which allowed a small chance that with a safety car intervention Alonso could get a spectacular result. Where as the optimum strategy would get 1 or 2 points at best. The logic, which would have appealed to an Alonso who was after race wins, was that a small chance of a great result would be better than a high chance of an average result. It was a high risk high reward strategy, and it was also given to Piquet in the hope that by fuelling him unuasually heavy, by the help of a safety car he could do a ‘Hockenheim.’

      A high risk high reward strategy from Renault is nothing unusaul and would not have aroused suspicion in Fernando, nor was the strategy in itself evidence of a conspiracy.

    2. I hope Alonso gets punished or thrown out of F1

      You should finish there your comment.

      1. If it turns out to be true, which we don’t know yet, there is no way that Alonso wasn’t in on it, no way at all. If so, he doesn’t deserve to be in F1. I seem to remember there were plenty of calls for Hamilton to be thrown out of F1 after Australia (predictably) for saying what his team manager asked him to, and it didn’t involve such danger and lack of regard for safety as ths plot (again, IF it turns out to be true). Why do you think Fernando should come out of this smelling of roses – if any other driver profited from such a thing, they would be instantly implicated.

  3. I think people need to remember that Renault are;

    Innocent until proven guilt here

    And in normal situations i would agree it is very worrying that they have been called before the court however this is the FIA we are talking about

    If they are guilty i think we can say goodbye as the fine and the loss of money from last year (due to loss of prize money as points are changed) would be more than enough for Renault to leave.

    1. Also if they are guilty it is not going to do Renault any favours with there 5 Star Crash rating adverts!!!!!!!!!!

      1. I don’t know – how’s about ‘our cars are so safe we crash them on purpose…’

        1. Yeah that would work for road cars, but I don’t know if it would work for open-wheel racing cars.

  4. Wow. It seems like they found enough inconsistencies or effective admissions from the Spa interviews to shut the case quite quickly. If the allegations are true I can’t believe that Goshn will not have Flavs head on a platter. But it seems Alonso will come out of a dung heap smelling like a rose again. He’s not mentioned, except as the beneficiary of the fraud, and only “team representatives” are being called.

    I wonder if Luca is wondering if getting Alsono is worth the drama that follows the man around

    1. One also wonders if Fisi got the call up shortly after Ferrari saw the FIA visit Renault in Spa. If I’m Ferrari I’m flailing around right now trying to secure my line up because my one signed driver is injured and awaiting medical evaluation and the other could be banned. Ferrari may be forced to get friendly with Kimi again. If he has already inked a deal they may need to lock in a decent guy or an option for him soon. The best option would seem to be Trulli (Yes, for the all Italian Ferrari line up)

      1. HounslowBusGarage
        4th September 2009, 21:24

        Interesting, interesting . . .

      2. Wouldnt it be ironic or karma for fisi to end up in the ferrari seat and they tell alonso to go packing because of this.
        If this is true it is worse than anything with the spy scandal… but wait alonso was hip deep in that also. He and Pedro were using the data in the simulator and texting each other about it.

    2. I wonder if Luca is wondering if getting Alsono is worth the drama that follows the man around

      There was plenty of drama following Schumacher and Benetton (which became today’s Renault, and also had Flavio at the helm at the time), but Ferrari felt Schumacher was worth that drama. When they signed him fairly early in 1995, he had suffered a tainted ’94. Remember the proven allegations of banned launch and traction control on the B194, for which there was no punishment ostensibly because there was only circumstantial evidence of their use? The unauthorised removal of the filter from the refuelling equipment leading to Verstappen’s fireball at Hockenheim? Schumacher’s overtaking of Hill before the start of the British GP and his subsequent ignoring of a black flag? His disqualification at Spa for plank irregularities? His collision with Hill at Adelaide? His much-publicised (and later retracted) unsportsmanlike comments about Hill towards the end of the season?

      When Schumacher finally got to Ferrari, the drama continued – Jerez ’97, Silverstone ’98, A1-Ring ’02, Indy ’02, Monaco ’06 – but he did win 5 consecutive WDCs…

  5. Interesting that S Hughes mentions that, so far, in all the coverage absolutely nothing has been made of Alfonso’s position on all this…

    Given that the only way his fuel strategy worked was in these circumstances it will be impossible for him to say “I knew nothing” won’t it?…

    If he is the “complete driver” all rate him to be I can’t see him not knowing and all this could give the red team a problem couldn’t it?….

    If they do announce Alonso at Monza that is pre the WMSC meeting…

    If they have allowed Kimi to go and he has a drive with another good team lined up (I live in hope) then what happens if Alonso gets a substantial ban?… and then Felipe doesn’t make it back?….

    Don’t forget that Alonso got off with knowing all about Stepneygate despite the e mails….


    1. One rule for … you know the rest.

    2. If they have allowed Kimi to go and he has a drive with another good team lined up (I live in hope) then what happens if Alonso gets a substantial ban?…

      Hey, Lady, keep calm… Kimi is coming back for his real home. McLaren and their fans are waiting for him with open arms! I´m prying for Ferrari to let him go…

      1. Hey Becken, I slightly disagree. I’m a Kimi fan and I want him to stay as far as he can from McLaren ;)

    3. I don’t see how they can implicate Alonso unless they’ve got evidence of him being in on it.

      1. That’s true, but if Alonso is going to Ferrari, just how hard would FIA look for such evidence?

        Cynical I know, but the precedent is there for Alonso escaping punishment from FIA for incidents he was in on and involved with (Ferrari data mining) when he was off elsewhere (back to Renault).

        There is one extraneous factor: if Renault and Piquet are found guilty, presumably the latter could shed some light on Alonso’s involvement. Or otherwise.

      2. That’s true re. evidence, but do you think Alonso would have been totally unaware of the plan if it turns out to be true? Would any other driver escape the finger of suspicion pointing at them in such a scenario?

  6. But what about Piquet Jr? If the allegation is true and Nelson was ordered to crash, did he have to do it? Are you allowed to do anything just to save yourself a race seat?

    1. True, but how can the FIA punish him when he isn’t even racing in F1 any more?

      1. With this, Piquet Jr. is a death man for F1, wich team would want him after this??

      2. They could make sure he doesn’t come back. Take his superlicense away.

        Apparently on his twitter he said that he had good news coming about a drive next year. Or at least some fans told me he said so

        1. Piquet Jr has fans? LOL!

          1. I lost any respect for someone named piquet after the excuse for a kick in the 1982 german gp incident

          2. Lol, yeah there are. Guess you need to be a bit nutty for that though. They claimed he’s the best driver in this decade.

            It’s a shame Piquet jr wasn’t able to show any of this greatness in his 27 races. Of course that was all because Flavio was determined to destroy him and gave him a car consistenly slower by at least 8 tenths of a second *rolls eyes*

        2. Apparently on his twitter he said that he had good news coming about a drive next year.

          Oh yes, Cirque du Soleil has hired Nelsinho. He will be crashing open wheel cars in Las Vegas.

          “Too young to die, too old to drive” is the name of the show.

        3. Exactly, they can take away his Super license and ban him from returning in any FIA approved motorsport.
          Just so that others learn that you can’t risk others’ lives (alongwith yours) and get away just by being the whistle-blower.

          If Piquet Jr.’s allegation is true that is one more major character flaw and lack of self confidence in himself. Guys like Hamilton wouldnt even give way to the same team-mate in quali, let alone crash which is illegal, immoral and risky.

          1. Above in reply to:

            They could make sure he doesn’t come back. Take his superlicense away.


    2. This is what has got me wondering about the whole sorry affair too – presuming they are the whistleblowers, and there seems little doubt that they are, then what on earth is going through the Piquet’s heads? Surely by dredging up all this history Piquet Jr is signing his own F1 death warrant whether the allegations are true or false. Either way he will wind up unemployable, because if he did crash deliberately in order to save his seat for 2009 then his reputation will be damaged beyond repair, and if his claims are dismissed then nobody will want to take on someone who is willing to cause this much trouble for them if things go wrong. On top of that, it’s not as if Piquet Jr’s shown enough talent for anyone to say it’s worth taking a risk on him, so I don’t really see what he’s getting out of all this except revenge, which, when there’s several hundred jobs on the line and big reputations at stake is hardly a very savoury motive.

      I suppose that when all’s said and done the Piquets are moneyed enough to get by in the world regardless of how the matter ends. Piquet may well have called Briatore his executioner, but it’s more accurate to say that Piquet Jr’s is a suicide case, that he (and not forgetting the role of his father either) killed his own career through lack of judgement and through plain lack of talent. I don’t know, maybe there’s a tragedy in there somewhere. We’ll see.

  7. All of this has been pretty low profile. No screaming headlines or sound bites ( Remember Mclaren, some could not wait to have their say). Then late statement last thing on a Friday. Even if they are found to be guilty there will be no 50 million pound fine and maybe not even a ban. You see, Renault is not Mclaren and Lewis is not involved.

    1. You know it!

      1. You bet I know it! Ha, Ha.

    2. Maybe they could find a way to involve Lewis

      1. Ha, that is so funny but has a ring of ze truth in it. :)

  8. If Alonsos win is disallowed and he is disqualified will the positions and points for those who finished 2nd to 9th be upliftded? If so who won the drivers title last year?

    1. Lewis, by 3 points instead of 1.

    2. Theoretically, I think it’s possible, but I’d want to have a wade through the International Sporting Code before saying I knew for sure.

  9. I honestly don’t know how the FIA will decide to handle this. Call me cynical but I think the verdict and any punishment if Renault are found guilty will have more to do with politics than what is fair based on the evidence and rules. It could be Mosley’s last big case while still FIA President and he doesn’t like manufacturers at the moment.

    If Renault did receive a big punishment I don’t think they will stay if F1.

  10. Sick of the stupid FIA show always undermining the racing.

    It’s their stupid incompetent fault they didn’t do anything at the time when it would have counted for something. You have to wonder if Max now wants Briatore’s scalp (Ron is gone, who else it there to gun for to keep busy).

    Is this another instance of the FIA being too lazy to listen to radio transmissions at the time.

    FOTA and FOM should be preparing to dump the FIA in 2012 if Todt installs Mosley as his “F1 Commissioner” come October, the thought of Max running F1 for years to come sends shivers down my spine.

    I don’t even like Renault and if it was deliberate they should have been punished, but it should have been last season. They shouldn’t be tainting this season, I can’t see how this can do anyone any benefit except Max’s ego. Last season is done. Move on, the rest of the world has.

    1. Depends what evidence they had and when they had it. It seems very likely now that new evidence has come to light and it came from someone on Piquet’s side.

      I have my gripes about the FIA but I’m not going to argue they should ignore an allegation of a team crashing a car on purpose.

  11. Renault statement:

    The ING Renault F1 Team acknowledges the FIA’s request for representatives of the team to appear before the FIA World Motor Sport Council in Paris on the 21st of September 2009. Before attending the hearing, the team will not make any further comment.

    1. You think they would have left their sponsor’s name out of there.

      Oh wait, ING are quitting anyway aren’t they? In that case, never mind…

  12. If they are found guilty, then in my opinion Alonso would actually be one of the more innocent parties, unless it can be proven that he was actively involved in the ‘plan’. If he benefitted from a conspiracy between Flavio and Nelsinho that he knew nothing of, then Alonso isn’t any more to blame than any of the other drivers who benefitted. Also, for the last couple of years he has been more interested in seeking the odd great result anyway rather than consistant good ones, and last year Renault did adopt a few odd strategies in races. It’s going to be a tough one to call.

    Indeed, if they are found to be in contravention; a hefty fine would probably be the fairest conclusion. To disqualify them so long after the event would render the fantastic conclusion to last years championship in a whole new light. Then again, a hefty fine may well see Renault pull out and put Briatore in a very bad position with the FIA in terms of a buyout, which has seemed to be the rumour whenever a Renault withdrawal has been mentioned before…

    Do we even know who made these claims yet?

    1. Do we even know who made these claims yet?

      Nope, no evidence so far. But I wouldn’t be surprised if little bits started appearing in the Brazilian press now.

      1. When FIA only wanted to say it was investigating a race result and wouldn’t say where their new evidence came from, Ecclestone revealed that it was about the Singapore 2008 race and Piquet Jr.

        I would assume he knows what he’s talking about.

    2. Be sure, Piquet Jr….

    3. I find it fascinating how some people are convinced Alonso wouldn’t have known anything if this was all true. This is Alonso we’re talking about – control freak, involved in setting up and strategy and not one to be told a bizarre strategy without knowing why.

      1. If “it gives a slim chance of a win, especially if lots of cars are overtaken or if there’s a safety car at the right time” was good enough for a large majority of fans and journalists in the immediate aftermath of the race, then surely it would be good enough for Alonso.

        What’s certain is that a number of people will try to pin it on Alonso whatever the outcome. Maybe he remotely spun Piquet’s car himself….

  13. I still don’t believe a team would do this or maybe I am just being hopeful.
    If they did then Renault and Alonso and Piquet has shown themselves to be desperate and immoral and ready to go against every sporting rule. Not only a huge risk to safety but did influenced the outcome of last year’s title. As a Massa fan and F1 fan it is shocking, Lewis won the title and is this is true it takes away from both him and Massa’s achievements. The consequences are off the scale and that and the respect Renault should have for F1 and everyone involved makes me believe they are innocent.
    This should have been sorted last year when it would have made a difference, now it’s just Mosley’s last goodbye.

  14. If renault are found Guilty surely the results need to be changed to the order the drivers where in prior to the crash ????? ie Massa Hamilton Kimi which would mean Massa is 2008 F1 Champ ???

    1. I don’t think so, at all.
      What would be somewhat fair, but I also doubt it, since the race was heavily influenced it should not give championship any points, what would also lead Massa to winning the 2008 championship…
      Am I way too wrong?

      1. Massa was excluded due to a Ferrari foul and scored nothing. So excluding Renault can have no effect on the championship outcome for the WDC. End of story. If you want to fiddle with the time space continuum and assume that the accident would have changed events down the line, you have to consider Hamilton scoring even more points as well.

        Before a new wave of “Lewis is not the true champion” conspiracy mongering erupts, lets look at the facts.

        1. I was just saying that if they where disquailfied then the most logical thing would be to treat it as a stoped race back the ranking to the last completed lap and issue points acordingly that would be a fair and logical suggestion not an Anti Lewis conspiracy

          1. I disagree – surely the most logical thing would be to rob Alonso and Renault of the 10 points from that race, and leave everything else as it is.

            Arguing “what if” about the race result if the crash hadn’t happened is an absolutely impossible task, and there’s no reason to suggest that the order before the crash would have been the final order of the race without it. So it doesn’t seem fair to award point on that basis. Bear in mind also that this happened before halfway so if the race had been stopped and not restarted, no points would have been scored by anyone.

            Finally, the precedent of when McLaren was disqualified from the WC in 07 is that they didn’t score points but the teams behind them in the races, didn’t score more points (e.g. 10 for second behind a first-placed McLaren). So in this case Alonso and Renault would lose 10 but no one else gain anything.

            Kinda makes sense to me anyway!

    2. If Renault are found guilty

      This is a crime, so crimes are only committed by persons.

      If there are evidences, what FIA should do is to ban for the rest of his/their life those people involved, and send the evidence to the court for being evaluated civil and/or criminal responsibilities.

      If not, If I were Renault, I will sue the FIA and all those guys that have been discrediting its name.

    3. HounslowBusGarage
      4th September 2009, 21:29

      Hardly. It was lap 12 after all, in which case the race hadn’t reached 75% duration for full points to be awarded.

  15. Flavio, Flavio, Flavio.
    You might want to try rose tinted glasses to se if you can make things look better.
    This affair is so disappointing. F1 has become the playground of the unscrupulous, and now seems controlled by cheats and lawyers, both of whicn make me ill. Sorry, I forgot to mention Schiesters and poliyicians. Nobody lives with their contracts and commitment is rare. Ferrari should look well into the onus of Fernando driving for them. I don’t like the fact that I’m not to sure that he didn’t know about this prior to last week. Did he, He should have been the one to step forward. And I beleive that should this be true, that J> would have said something to him at some point since the occurence. I hate the fact that I can’t but beleive that there’s probably some bit of truth in the allegations, and I don’t feel that Renault the manufacturer is responsible. The persons alleged to be involved and or knowledgable, if found guilty, should be banned and fined personally, rather than corporate Renault. Maybe that wpold have an influence on cheaters in the future.
    This is so disappointing to me as a fan of F1 for over45 years.

  16. This looks bad for Alonso. To be honest, I wouldn’t put it past him to be in on this.

  17. Xeith, This is on a different subject altogether.
    I read, although I can’t remember where, possibly here, that Grosjean said that OP2 cars had more ground effect that aerodynamoc downforce and in turn were able to follow more closely and were also more able to pas than F1 cars. I was wondering if you might investigate this and give some insights into the subject should this prove to be the case. It seems to me that should it be, then maybe reverting to a limited form of ground effect would be the way for f1 to improve the passing game.
    On the other hand , it seems that with the laptimes as close , and the cars so nearly equal, this present condition is not going to change. With the advent of KERS, it seems that if you don’t have it, you’re going to be in deep do-do, as I understand that KERS will be allowed next year, and I personally this this bring a positive to F1. It is something that can related to road cars, just like disc breaks, oberhead cams, 4 valve per cylinder heads, and independant suspensionall but the last developed in aviation prior to daining acceptence in the automotive field.
    To get back to my original querey, it seems to me that the primary reasons for banning Ground effect was safety do to the probelms should skirt jamming or suspension failure occure.
    But now in the age of carbon fiber tubs, suspension tethers, huge runoff areas incredible braking capability, and power steering, all the reasons for its being banned are mute, and the ability of the cars to draft and pass with it would seem to me to point in that direction
    And best of all the cars were so much better looking in the ground effect era.
    Thanks for taking the time to read this, and I hope you will think about writing on the issue.

  18. Would Piquet really risk a future f1 drive by making false allegatitions like that just to get back at flavio?

    1. HounslowBusGarage
      4th September 2009, 21:42

      Quite honestly Sam, I wonder who he might drive for in the future even if this hadn’t all blown up. Few drivers get binned part way through the season and then turn up at another team the following season.
      if you get binned, you get binned – often for good.
      His father’s money apart, Nelsinho would not have had a lot of attraction to any F1 team manager having been thrown out by Renault mid-season. There are plenty of other talented drivers out there who haven’t been fired – yet.
      Junior’s only F1 chance for an F1 drive now is if his father can either buy a team or make a convoluted money deal with a struggling team. No one else will touch him or his possibly poisonous father.

  19. People need to stop judging Alonso. Renault haven’t been proven guilty yet and not even in any of the rumours has Alonso been implicated in the plot. Even the FIA statement emphasises a conspiracy between Renault and Piquet. I really doubt Alonso would have been the source of any plot, despite what the people who demonise him say its not in his character.

    Also people need to stop making snide comments about trouble following Alonso etc. They of course base their criticism on what happened in 2007. I don’t want to refight the old battles over Hamilton vs Alonso, sufice to say the troubles in the team weren’t Alonso’s fault as intra-team fighting has occured often in McLaren multiple times over the years and had more to do with Ron Dennis’ hypocracy than Fernando Alonso.

    Alonso is still the most complete driver in Formula 1, Kimi or Lewis may at times be faster than him, but Alonso is the complete package and this scandal won’t damage his standing in F1. He could still drive for any team he wanted.

    1. alonso is not the complete package. he only won the 2 championships due to dnfs from KR & MS.

    2. Sure…he might have two WDCs under his belt, but his morals aren’t up to par. Fernando loves scandal, and always seems to be in the middle of it. This is just another example. I have a habit of glorifying teams/drivers, but to me, Fernando’s just bad news.

      1. “but his morals aren’t up to par”

        Again with judging Fernando, give the guy a break. He fell out with a team which is and always has been hypocritical in its treatment of drivers, many drivers would have done the same, and have done in the past. People are prejudging Alonso saying he’s guilty when no one has anything on him.

        What has he actually done that was moraly suspect? He wasn’t an inocent party in 2007 but was the victim of rather than the cause of the breakdown of the team and its hypocracy. At no other time in his career has he been found guilty of doing anything morally suspect. The claims against Fernando’s integrity are and always have been false.

        1. Alonso asking for information from the Ferrari mole sounds pretty moraly deplorable to me.

          Amazingly he wasn’t punished because his information could nail McLaren and that was more important. Still, he was proven to be a driving force behind spy gate.

          1. Alonso wasn’t the man who instigated the stealing of Ferrari data, the whole team used it, as did Hamilton. It was simply that Alonso still had evidence of his using it, and was the man who exposed the cheating in the end.

            But I think it’s fair to say we are not close to knowing the entire truth about what happened in the team that year, especially considering Fernando has been sworn to not speak about it until after this year, and we probably won’t hear his side of the story until after he retires.

            To be honest expecting everyone to be whiter than white in F1 is unreasonably in such a cut throat business where the rules are bent by every team. Remember Lewis lying to stewards in Melbourne, BAR having seperate fuel tanks, Ferrari having special treatment from the FIA. All teams bend the rules and Alonso shouldn’t be singled out as somehow moraly suspect.

          2. Hamilton was found to have no connection to it.

            Alonso was specifically emailing questions he wanted answered. Are you seriously claiming that that’s not something morally wrong?????

    3. What he is a complete package of is the real question… He is in the middle of every major scandal in F1 in the last 3 years barring Max’s party.

      1. We don’t really know for sure where Alonso was at the time of Max’s party.

    4. Let’s not forget that Alonso fell out with Renault, before his move to McLaren.

      It was only after his return to Renault, After consuming a rather large slice of humble pie, that he matured the **** up and stopped throwing his toys out the pram so much.

      Of course that was partly because this time he bothered to have “confirmed number one driver” written in his contract – something that seemed to slip his mind when he moved to McLaren.

      I wonder if he’ll have confirmed number one status at Ferrari?

  20. Mike "the bike" Schumacher
    4th September 2009, 21:25

    Spygate + indygate + liegate x 1,000,000 = Crashgate.

    Renault and flavio should be thrown out and Piquet should never be allowed back. Its so bad for the sport.

  21. Sein chez la femme
    4th September 2009, 22:03

    Even Massa had his own suspicions
    Even Felipe Massa suspected Nelson Piquet crashed deliberately in Singapore last year and faced Flavio Briatore on the incident in person. At least according to F1-live

  22. Circumstantial evidence?

  23. Well, I’m guessing mine need to go ahead and be removed, because they wouldn’t make a bit of sense. I now feel really bad/guilty that I got caught up in someone’s lack of intelligence. Thanks, Keith, for keeping your blog in tip-top shape, and keeping spammers away! Which in this case, might just be me…

    1. Oops, well this doesn’t make sense, either! Got my email, and now I’m pretty relieved to find out I’m not a spammer! Whew. I was pretty worried there for a second.

  24. Surely Rosberg wouldn’t want his first win to come by a technicality.

    1. I was thinking the same, but the only other way to change the result would interfere with the WDC and make Massa Champion. If they DQ Alonso, Rosberg wins. If they take the race as finished on lap 12 its half points to positions then, Massa is champion. If they say the race is void and no points count then Massa is champ.

      Perhaps they should just let the result stand but punish Renault in other ways to prevent us having to rip up the record books.

      1. When Schumacher was disquailified from the 1997 championship, only his results were affected. Other drivers had the exact same points they did before the disqualification.

        By that logic (not that the FIA ever bothers with it) if Renault are guilty, Alonso loses his win but Rosberg stays 2nd. That seems like a fair result.

        1. so then when we get around to the singapore gp, it will say previous winner. – ?, you cant have a race with out a winner,
          it will be interesting to see how this unfolds expecially with piquets grudge against old flav

    2. Rosberg benefitted almost as much from Piquet’s crash as Alonso did.

      He also was out of the points, with a compromised strategy, before the crash and he was actually in the lead after it.

      He did get a drive through penalty, but that didn’t hurt him much.

  25. If Renault are found guilty then there punishment shouldn’t be any worse that Ferrari’s after they fixed the 2002 Austrian GP.

    1. I don’t think the two situations compare: Renault are being accused of deliberately causing a crash, which has grave safety implications, and is quite different to the Ferrari situation, with one driver allowing another to overtake.

  26. lucky hamilton finished 5th in brazil then. otherwise massa would have been crowned champion but now may have that revoked.

    1. When Hamilton came to Brazil he assumed he needed just a 5th to become champion, so that’s what McLaren aimed for, rather than go all out for a win.

      Had Hamilton known that his Singapore points are no longer counted he would have raced all out to win, not just settle for points.

      In fact everything that happened post Singapore 2008 might have happened differently had teams known that points from that race are not counted.

      You can’t just revoke the results of a race and change the WDC after a year.

      Anyways Massa lost out in that race because the Ferrari pit crew messed up his stop. Let’s not blame Renault for that too.

      1. (Anyways Massa lost out in that race because the Ferrari pit crew messed up his stop. Let’s not blame Renault for that too.)


        1. Second that, if massa some how inherits the win, im not going to watch f1 anynore (i dont know how that would happen though)

          1. I wouldn’t want to watch it either. Once the precedent to alter past results is set it the FIA can indulge in a witchhunt whenever they want.

            Are the also going to strip Schumacher of the 94 title for crashing into Hill and for using an illegal launch control in his Benetton?

  27. Would Massa’s crew have made the same mistake if his position was less precarious? I don’t know – obviously Massa thought so if reports of his attack on Flavio are right – but the possibility does taint the championship – not Hamilton the driver – but the championship. If there is anything in this Renault must be deeper in doubt for 2010 and it won’t do anything good for Toyota’s deliberations either. Remember Flavio is a driver manager too, including of Webber, so his tentacles are deep and if he is punted there is major change and possibly even in the Renault engine contractor.

  28. The sri lankan
    4th September 2009, 23:47

    if they get banned……….this will hand the victory to Nico Rosberg which means its the 1st victory for Toyota powered CAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  29. Terry Fabulous
    5th September 2009, 0:11

    The real loser in this whole affair is Massa.

    He was leading confidently at the time only to be screwed over by the safety car and of course further stuffed by his pit release man.

    Looks like Massa had two possible race victories taken from him by forces outside his control.

    But that’s Motor Racing. I hope he gets another chance to challenge for a title, but I doubt it.

    1. Which was the second race?

      Massa can’t complain too much considering the FIA gifted him Spa and then there’s the incident with Bourdais where he got away scot free and Bourdais took the rap.

      1. Terry Fabulous
        5th September 2009, 22:39

        I was thinking about the Hungaroring when his engine failed.

        Yeah I guess you are right there, he did luck into extra points at Fuji and Spa.

        Swings and roundabouts

  30. I want to see a fine iqual to the one givem to McLaren or even worst – Briatore is mob, but I woult make a lot of money if I would bet Fernando’s hand is not right there alongside is current boss… I has that kind of personality – he’s an *******..

    Thr rule aply to all in the same way – we already know Ferrarti is a ‘special’ friend to FIA, let’s hope Renault isn’t another… so I may say with reason the FIA has been smassing McLaren for every little thing it happends… It’s a shame, it’s embarassing… it’s too much **** to take…

  31. If they are found guilty but get off lighter than McLaren did, then it will be a massive miscarriage of justice. I know McLaren’s situation supposedley effected a large amount of the season, but I think having one race manipulated to such an extent is worse.

  32. Prisoner Monkeys
    5th September 2009, 1:33

    The way I see it, there’s only really a few things that could be realistically done if Renault are found guilty:

    1) Strip them of their 2008 points. It would be justified, especially if their intention was to boost Alonso’s standing. However, it doesn’t really do anything. The 2009 season is over, so all Renault really suffer is a truckload of embarrassment.

    2) Strip them of their 2009 points. Renault really do get punished with this one, but it may be seen as a over-reaction because it happened a year ago. The WMSC has a history of issuing harsh penalties, like th McLaren verict; the obvious intention being to dissuade anyone from ever doing it again.

    3) Suspend them for the rest of the season and demote them to the back of the 2010 grid. Renault keep their 2009 points because they didn’t actually do anything wrong this season, but they’re not allowed to race. And because the championship doesn’t go back to Spain, there isn’t going to be any pressure the way there was post-Hungary (which was too harsh of a penalty to begin with, but I digress). As added incentive to never do it again, Renault would be forced to run the numbers 26 and 27 in 2010, much the same way McLaren had to carry 22 and 23 last year.

    I don’t think they can realistically adjust the 2008 championship a year ater the fact. Even if it was completely justified by Renault’s cheating, it wouldn’t go down to well. If I were Nico Rosberg, I wouldn’t been too keen on inheritin my maiden victory by default a year after it had happened.

    This is a crime, so crimes are only committed by persons.

    If there are evidences, what FIA should do is to ban for the rest of his/their life those people involved, and send the evidence to the court for being evaluated civil and/or criminal responsibilities.

    So what, you want Briatore’s head to roll?

    They cannot punish single individuals, even if only a handful of people were in on it. The reason is that the people who would be in on it are Renault; they’re the names commonly associaed with the team: Briatore, Alonso, Piquet, Symonds et al. They represent the marque far more than John Q. Pitboard Man does. If it was intentional, it was a decision made by the team, for the team, and justice is due. Even if their only crime is guilt by assoiation.

    1. “This is a crime, so crimes are only committed by persons. ”
      That sentence is nonsense anyway. Companies can be persecuted and found guilty as a whole too.

      In the spygate case they punished McLaren AND they banned the people involved (apart from Alonso and de la Rosa)

      1. “This is a crime, so crimes are only committed by persons. ”

        That sentence is nonsense anyway. Companies can be persecuted and found guilty as a whole too.

        Oh yesss! We have seen many corporations in jail… When have you seen a Corporation accused in a criminal case?

        You are not a lawyer, do you?

        1. There is such a thing as corporate manslaughter, in which a company itself is charged, rather than any individuals.

          Likewise many (almost all) violations of competition law are applied to companies, with very few actual individuals being punished.

  33. All this mess smells bad…very bad and the Stinky this case is just one man,the abominable F1’s dinosaur BRIATORE I find it hard to believe that Renault will continue associating your image around this crapula

  34. Another witchcraft hunting by the FIA. What can we earn from this? Nothing…

    1. The sheer entertainment of a public trial.

  35. All this whole issue does is bring to light how pathetic a person Piquet is. Anyone who would make up such garbage is a looser, anyone how takes orders to crash a car is a looser.. I think the case is closed ;)

  36. Evidence? We don’t need no stinking evidence to bash Alonso!

  37. Max almost missed out. After Ron Dennis, Flavio Briatore is Max’s least favorite person, it was Flavio that Max refered to as a looney in the BBC Silverstone interview. When you consider that the only way new evidence can arise is from Nelson Jr statements and I would be surprised if they are substaniated by anybody at Renault (unless Fernando has been texting again). If true, this has to have been decided pre race as all radio traffic is recorded and monitored. All telemetery can be investigated and no uplink is fitted or allowed. So Max will have his day in court with Nelson as star witness and judging by some of his comments in the media Flavio is in for a stormy ride. Bernie will be watching with interest. QPR on Saturday would be worth watching.

    A couple of other points that have been raised here and I’d like to comment;

    1. McLaren’s fine was paid partly by FOM, partly by technical partners and partly by McLaren Group. It was imposed because FIA knew McLaren could afford to pay it. If (a big if)found guilty and they get a fine. Renault’s fine would be smaller because Renault’s biggest sponsor ING isn’t going to pay a bean (of the 6 sponsors they might get a contribution from Mutua, Pepe and Megafon) and Renault would be unlikley to pay up.
    2. Piquet Jr will be ending his formula career at the hearing. There is not a team in the paddock that will touch him (even if he was fast). Alonso tainted himself over Ferrari-gate and is only employable because he didn’t give evidence or talk about it (outside of what Ron Dennis disclosed) and Alonso’s a very fast racing driver.
    3. The result of the Singapore GP. As everybody seems to agreee the WDC and WCC stay the same. However, all of the teams that finished in the points benefit (FOM money) as do Honda (Button 9th becomes 8th).

    1. If the FIA had it in for Renault why did they pass up an opportunity to punish them at the end of 2007?

      1. Because they’re afraid that Renault would leave F1 for good if a hefty fine is imposed on them.

        There’s no danger of that happening with McLaren, hence the $100 million fine.

        Perhaps McLaren should threaten to quit the next tie they’re hauled up for something.

      2. Keith

        The 2007 charge was before Flavio started making noise about breakaway series and questioning Max’s government. Just as importantly it involved Renault having information about McLarens car. I’m sure the outcome would have been very different had it been Ferrari information.

        1. Flavio called for a vote of no confidence in Max’s leadership as early as 1994. He’s been in Mosley’s bad books for some time.

  38. I dunno how Alonso could maintain a straight face on the podium & the post-race press conference. Either all of this untrue or Alonso must be the greatest actor since Marlon Brando. I tend to believe the latter. Nando & Brando!! This could have serious implication on the sport. This is in fact more serious than the 2007 espionage incident. If Alonso if found to be one of the main conspirators, he imo must be banned at least for an year. I don’t think even the immoral Ferrari ever asked Eddie Irvine or Rubens Barrichello to crash for Schumi to take advantage. Piquet Jr must be the dumbest driver ever, dumber than Barrichello!! The approach to the start-finish line is not a place to crash at all. The fact that he spun at the same place during the formation lap shows he was up to something. It could have been understandable if he walled at the tortoise, even Kimi walled it there. Maybe Piquet wanted to discredit himself totally ;) This is really bad for F1.

    1. Man, you really have it in for Alonso. Are you just jealous of him or something.

      1. Why should i be jealous of him? i’m not even a F1 driver.

  39. I’d just like to ask – when did everyone start taking Piquet Jnr so seriously? ‘Cos when he was driving, he was considered an absolute joke.

  40. Keith…

    Further up you wondered how they could implicate Alonso…

    I think that is quite clear….

    Given that it now seems common knowledge that the only way he could get in the points with a 12 lap fuel load from where he was on the grid was for this to happen you have to ask “Why did he accept the strategy if he didn’t know?”….

    Given that most commentators see Alonso as a “complete driver” a la Schumey (interesting comparison given tactics he sometimes employed) I don’t believe that Alonso wouldn’t have wanted to know EXACTLY how his strategy would pan out….

    But let’s see if the FIA come up with some excuse as they did with the e mails in “spygate”….

    1. Given his low qualifying position an aggressive fuel strategy wasn’t an unreasonable proposition. It was their first race on a new street circuit – there was always going to be a good chance the safety car would make an appearance.

      1. I think you’ll find that the window to get Fernando anywhere at all totally relied on this happening at precisely this point….

        That’s the problem…

        The odds of a safety car exactly as Alonso pitted was very slim….

        I didn’t realise at the time myself….

        1. 100% correct Snowcat.

  41. It is comman knowledge that Piquet sr was a bad looser. The things now brought up by Piquet jr is complete in the line of the Piquet family. We can’t win so we say terrible things. First he was saying that Briatore doesn’t understan the F1. when that didn,t had the impact that he wanted he maked up this story…… don’t listen to that boy he is not F1 material he had his change and he blew it……

  42. I was shocked when I red these all responses becaue most of people in UK seems to belive that this gate is ture.
    In Japane(I am Japanese), most of F1 fans think it is ridiculous Pique’s evil scheme. Few Japanese F1 fan think this gate is ture.
    I’m getting sick of F1.
    F1 is European stuff and It’s not easy for us to understand like European Machiavellism.
    I come to know why F1 is not popular in the U.S. and Asia.

    1. I don’t know if it is true that most people believe it – will have to do a poll…

    2. Maybe Japanese f1 fans are sour that Honda pulled out & Toyota have replaced Force India as back markers? Circumstantial evidence points to the fact that something was indeed wrong. The world is getting evil by the day, people are coming up with evil methods to succeed. I wouldn’t put it past Flavio & Alonso. This incident definitely needs to be probed. Flavio is after the same man who went into hiding on some remote island to escape a Jail term. my only question is why did it take Piquet so long to disclose this matter?

      plz don’t tell be he feared losing his seat at renault, he would have lost it anyway.

      1. maybe because the japanese are a rational people?

        1. maybe because the japanese are a rational people?

          Pearl Harbour??

          1. Are you seriously bringing up Pearl Harbour as an example to prove that Japanese people are not rational?

          2. @ sykes

            No, not at all. I was just trying to point out that “Machiavellism” exists everywhere.

          3. ….I think i’m going to ignore your comments from now on. Obviously it’s just a whole pile of ill thought bias. I doubt that the Japanese being “sour” over honda leaving and toyota not doing well have ANYTHING to do to disbelieving something that sounds like rubbish.

          4. At first I thought it was just rubbish too, but then the FIA organised this hearing.

            If it’s such rubbish, why is the FIA asking to hear Renault explain that they didn’t cheat? There must be some evidence for FIA to take this story serious.

  43. Remember Max Mosley called Favio ‘head of the loonies’ and Flav was a key part of the power house that got Max to finally resign. You don’t think there could be any witch hunting here in the last days of the MM dynasty? I mean that would assume the FIA was run as a personal fiefdom, which of course is absurd.. right?

  44. I saw this article:

    “Should Renault be punished, it is almost certain the penalty will be severe, especially as deliberately crashing a car puts the lives of not only the driver, but also marshals and spectators at risk.

    Alonso would certainly be stripped of his victory, potentially even all his points from last season, which may result in Renault being forced to pay back all their prize money for 2008.”

  45. Keith

    Please do a poll!
    I do want to know how many F1 fans think Flavio did it deliberately.
    What I am interesting most is not if this gate is ture or not, but how many fans trust F1.

    Flavio might disappoint fans, but before any proof is revealed, I never want to doubt of this sports.

    Yes It is true, Japanese was disappointed at Honda and Toyota.
    Now in Japan, Honda airs a TV CM saying ” We take part in Eco GP!”(Which means they quit racing and focusing on Eco solution.)…  

    1. I never trusted the Illuminati bosses who run this sport.

  46. Following Hakki’s comment, I’ve started a poll to see how many people think it was deliberate: Did Piquet crash on purpose? (Poll)

  47. I have posted this before, but I think it is really relevant to every article on this subject. This is from ‘The Official Formula 1 Season Review 2008’ book that I was bought for Christmas:

    Although nobody wanted to be too outspoken on the record, many teams were deeply suspicious that Fernando Alonso’s victory in Singapore, the first of the year for Renault, had been choreographed, with Nelson Piquet Jr crashing at an opportune moment to trigger the safety-car period that swung the race towards Alonso.

    Alonso had been quick from Friday’s first free practice and was deeply unhappy when a fuel-feed problem afflicted him early in Q2, before he’d had a chance to set a time. Starting only 15th on the bumpy Singapore street circuit, where overtaking was doubly difficult, his prospects were not promising. Piquet Jr had not made it out of Q1.

    Normally, faced with Alonso’s situation, a team will fuel up and run a long first stint one stopper in an attempt to make up track position on some of the two-stopping cars and those one-stoppers with shorter stints. To go aggressive on strategy will only work on a circuit where overtaking is particularly easy and you have good top-end engine performance. Neither applied to Renault at Singapore’s spectacular Marina Bay circuit and Alonso said they did it because the brakes were running hot all weekend and would not cope with a heavy one-stop fuel load.

    Alonso’s first stop, on lap 12 of the 61, was very early. On the next lap, team-mate Piquet Jr, who had already spun on the warm-up lap, received a radio instruction: “Push, Nelson!” At the time, he was going nowhere fast, stuck down in 16th position behind Barrichello’s Honda from the start. Was this a coded instruction? On the very next lap, Piquet Jr gyrated into the wall and brought out the safety car.

    Rosberg and Kubica were forced to pit under the safety car, as they would otherwise have run out of fuel, attracting driver-through penalties as a result of this year’s safety-car regulations. It proved that the first scheduled stints by anyone other than Alonso had been to pit on laps 14 and 15. Most teams have a very good handle on when the opposition are going to stop, so Alonso’s lap-12 stop was both as early as it legitimately could be and as late as possible if any ‘plan’ was to work.

    “Looking at it from a purely statistical point-of-view,” said a rival team strategist, “on a track like Singapore, stopping on lap 12 is not aggressive, it’s stupid, It’s something that cannot work. Your grandmother wouldn’t do it… Then, it’s true that stopping on lap 12 is the only way to open up a two-lap gap when the safety car will benefit only one car – the one that has stopped. And then, when you create this two-lap window and in it your team-mate crashes… If you add up the probability, you end up with a figure that is very close to zero.””

    1. When was the last time anyone planned to stop that early on (just less than 20% of the race distance) in a race?

      note: Remember that Schumacher’s 4 stop stratergy at Magny Cours was decided 2 laps into the race, and so does not count.

      1. Form a starting position that far down the grid, the only one that comes to mind is Hamilton in Monaco this year.

  48. Remember that after Japan 1990, Senna was found guilty of deliberately causing a crash so that he could win the title, but was not punished.

    I know that this was a long time ago, and the situation was slightly different, but the charge was essentially the same as that of Renault’s, and therefore a precedent could have already been set.

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.