Comments on: Renault face Singapore crash hearing

By: JSC

JSC — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 13:03:25 +0000

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.

By: Patrickl

Patrickl — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 08:03:57 +0000

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

By: Patrickl

Patrickl — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 07:56:13 +0000

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.

By: Patrickl

Patrickl — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 07:45:13 +0000

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.

By: Patrickl

Patrickl — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 07:36:02 +0000

What constant persecution? He only gets persecuted when he is involved in the major scandals.

By: Terry Fabulous

Terry Fabulous — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 21:39:44 +0000

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

By: Red Andy

Red Andy — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:16:47 +0000

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….

By: Red Andy

Red Andy — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:30:59 +0000

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.

By: sykes

sykes — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:19:07 +0000

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.

By: Rohan

Rohan — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 15:14:50 +0000

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.