Ecclestone offers millions to end bribe trial

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Bernie Ecclestone, 2013In the round-up: Bernie Ecclestone wishes to take advantage of a provision under German law for him to settle his bribery case in Germany.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Ecclestone Seeks to Settle Corruption Case for 25 Million Euros (Bloomberg)

“Defence lawyers for Bernie Ecclestone told the Munich judges trying him for corruption that the Formula One chief is prepared to pay Bayerische Landesbank 25 million euros ($33.6 million) if the criminal case is dropped.”

Ecclestone offers £20m to drop bribery trial (The Telegraph)

“His lawyers’ statement suggests the court process – due to run until October for two days a week – is proving a drain on Ecclestone. He has been keeping a noticeably lower profile in recent months.”

Ecclestone in talks to settle German bribery case (FT, registration required)

“German law has a provision that enables criminal cases to be settled with lesser punishments, including financial settlements, under certain circumstances.”

Ecclestone Makes Second Offer Of $40 Million To End Corruption Trial (Forbes)

“The first offer was declined and discussions about the second one are currently underway.”

Start, Red Bull Ring, 2014“Kein stehender Start nach Safety-Car” (Auto Motor und Sport, German)

Bernie Ecclestone says the plan for standing restarts in 2015 will now not go ahead, despite having been approved by the World Motor Sport Council last month, and now requiring the unanimous approval of teams to remove the rule for next year.

Ferrari deny Fry reports (Sky)

“According to Sky sources, Fry has been dismissed in the latest act of behind-the-scenes bloodletting following the team’s underwhelming performances at the dawn of F1’s new hybrid era.”

Raikkonen heading in right direction (Autosport)

“It was more fun because the car has been feeling a bit better, which makes life easier and lets you enjoy it more.”

Marco Mattiacci: Ferrari not here to finish second, so no shutdown (The Guardian)

“We are about 1.2sec behind the leaders, which means months or even years of work, so we cannot allow ourselves to shut down mentally.”

‘F1 needs drivers to be heroes’ – Horner (ESPN)

“We need to allow the drivers to be able to express themselves more without being criticised. We need to allow their personalities to come out.”

New Jules Bianchi column: “Voyage to the centre of Formula One” (James Allen on F1)

“For me Ferrari is like a second family and to drive full time with that Prancing Horse remains my goal, my ultimate dream.”

Max Mosley sues Google over sex party photos (BBC)

“The 74-year-old wants Google to block pictures first published in the now-defunct tabloid News of the World, which he successfully sued in 2008.”

Petitioning Jean Todt, president, Federation Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) (Change)

Petition started by former FIA medical delegate Gary Hartstein in the wake of Michael Schumacher’s skiing accident.

Tweets

Comment of the day

Praise for Ferrari’s strategy which netted their best result of the season so far in Hungary:

The changing conditions demand quick thinking from drivers and team strategists and it makes the races way more interesting.

Mercedes did not want to risk, Ferrari had to and they went for the quick softs to secure their podium. I was watching Sky’s post-race programme and Marco Mattiacci’s eyes were wet after their amazing result. That man has passion and it’s not a bad thing.
@JCost

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Cyanide and George Tunnicliffe!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

It looked like a slow McLaren pit stop for Ayrton Senna had handed victory to Alain Prost at the Hockenheimring on this day in 1989. But a gearbox problem struck Prost with three laps to go, leaving Senna to head a one-two for the team.

Nigel Mansell was over 80 seconds behind in second place, while the other Ferrari of Gerhard Berger crashed out.

Here’s the start of the race – keep an eye out for a bizarre early retirement for Philippe Alliot.

http://youtu.be/WuZtnAs-yzY?t=1m38s

Image © James Moy Photography/Jamey Price, Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free

104 comments on Ecclestone offers millions to end bribe trial

1 2 3
  1. US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 30th July 2014, 0:10

    Ferrari have often had bold strategies that paid off in recent years. Maybe their poor performance has forced them to take bigger risks, but when it works out the rewards are surely sweeter for them and make for more exciting racing on track as well. Alonso’s win in Barcelona with 4 stops to everyone else’s 3 stops also springs to mind. Williams could learn a thing or two from them this year.

  2. David BR2 said on 30th July 2014, 0:11

    So German Law accepts b*!#@$ to drop bribe cases? Classic.

    • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 30th July 2014, 0:36

      I don’t see it as such a bad thing. The vast majority of cases never get to court as both parties tend to settle outside of court rather than endure the costs of the court system. This has the double advantage for the claiming party receiving a tidy sum that cannot be appealed, they get the compensation they think is fair enough, and the don’t have to go through the strain of the court process.

      Applying it to the state, as they are doing in Germany, has similar benefits. Which serves the interests of the public more: getting a large sum that can be redistributed to public works and infrastructure, and also helping to keep the courts free to attend to more serious cases, or spending precious time and resources dragging this trial out to an uncertain outcome and tying up the public legal system more?

      It’s (dare I say it while speaking of Germany?) efficient!

      • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 30th July 2014, 0:40

        It’s not efficient – it’s disgusting. This is a criminal offence, where the punishment can involve jail time. And he can BUY his way out of it? There is absolutely no way to paint that in a good light.

        • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 30th July 2014, 0:55

          @fluxsource Well that’s one view, and it all depends on what you want from your legal system.

          I’m not defending Bernie’s actions at all, but if a trial would cost the state money, and this way they can get a nice sum out of him to improve roads, schools and hospitals, then why not do that instead?

          It all depends on your stance on the whole thing, and I think this is highly culturally dependent. Is is better a rich man who’s committed a crime go to jail (probably with the vast majority of his sentence suspended) after an arduous lengthy and expensive legal process, or for the state to grab a tidy sum off of him that can be used to better society as a whole?

          I’d have a different view if he had raped/assaulted/killed someone, but then again that’s my personal hierarchy of seeing the inviolability of a persons body at the top of the list of things that go beyond being incapable of being paid off through fines. Bribery isn’t on that level to me so I’m ok with seeing Bernie fined a large sum for it.

          Not saying your view is wrong. Your view to want to see justice done in a courtroom, in public, for a crime is equally valid. But there are pros and cons to each.

          • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 30th July 2014, 8:12

            I’m not defending Bernie’s actions at all, but if a trial would cost the state money, and this way they can get a nice sum out of him to improve roads, schools and hospitals, then why not do that instead?

            Because the money is paid to BayernLB, not to the state. Because justice isn’t about getting the maximum amount of money, Because how on earth will this be a deterrent to both Bernie and others when have the opportunity to bribe people in the future.

            If this was a civil case then that’s fine – they’s BayernLBs prerogative to accept a settlement. But it’s a criminal case, and justice must be seen to be done.

          • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 30th July 2014, 9:27

            @fluxsource Ah ok my apologies. As it was a criminal case I assumed that any ‘winnings’ would go to the state and not a private party.

            I agree with the principle that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done, but I think a few of my arguments in favour of Bernie paying his way out still stand even if the money does go to BayernLB.

            @bascb makes some really good points on this whole thing and I agree with them. Anyway I think this is an ‘agree to disagree’ moment with us! Both of us I feel have valid views on the matter but I don’t think we’re going to persuade the other anytime soon!

          • The whole point of criminal law is to prevent things that in one way or another harm society by being allowed to happen, not just one civil party. BayernLB are not the only victims of Bernie’s bribe. Anyone who wants to do any business in Germany suffers from an increased risk they will get a bad deal because of a bribe paid by someone who feels safe from repercussions.

            I’m surprised accepting such a payoff, not for waiving their own victimhood but for sitting on the evidence that German commerce as a whole has been wronged, isn’t itself regarded as blackmail.

        • Jack (@jackisthestig) said on 30th July 2014, 2:23

          All of the parties involved in the Ecclestone trial hardly have the good of the sport and the interests of it’s fans in the forefront of their minds. If the ‘victims’ of Bernie and Gribwotshisname’s little financial arrangement are willing to accept a small reimbursement in order to make the trial go away then that’s up to them, the only injustice I feel is when I look at my bank statement and see how much my British Grand Prix tickets cost me this year!

          • Mike (@mike) said on 30th July 2014, 2:54

            You’re missing the point. Why should Bernie get out of it when a poorer man wouldn’t? If someone only had 25 mil, then was their crime worse?

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 6:17

            Well, @mike, honestly had Bernie been poorer, he would never have been able to payoff Gribowsky with 40 million, nor would he have even needed to, because there wouldn’t have been a Bambino trust with billions in it!

            Especially in a case like this, where its all about money, I am not sure this is such a bad solution. After all, what if the Judge decides on a prison sentence, with Bernies age etc, do you really think he would actually go to jail?

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 6:21

            Its not as if this is done only in Germany, just compare it to all the recent cases of banks paying hundreds of million of USD to the government for settlements on cases where the company and its executives faced criminal trials (as some of the money laundering and sending money to terrorist supporting states are made criminal acts in the US)

          • tmekt (@tmekt) said on 30th July 2014, 7:28

            @mike

            The thing is, though, that a poorer man would get out of it too if the other side would be willing to settle. The option exist for everyone equally, and it’s not always agreed to a huge sum of money like here.

            For example, if you get into a drunk fight that would otherwise go a potentially lengthy and expensive trial, you can try to settle with the other person and if you get lucky, it might lead to as moderate of a punishment as an apology or you only having to pay for the medical expenses. These would both be better as you’d avoid court trial and the risk of being found guilty, which could potentially cost you more and would lead to an addition in your criminal record.

            In this case specifically, a poorer person wouldn’t be in the same situation as they couldn’t have afforded the bribe and wouldn’t have even needed to give one in the first place as they don’t have a multibillion company to run. Anyway, I don’t personally understand why anyone would be specifically against Ecclestone settling. Surely the law should be the same for everyone? Just because you don’t agree with how he runs the F1 show doesn’t mean you get to exclude him from the legal procedures that are universally available to everyone.

          • maarten.f1 (@maarten-f1) said on 30th July 2014, 7:36

            @bascb I agree with you that Ecclestone will probably never go to jail, whether that’s due to his age or whatever. However, it does mean the difference between a conviction or not. If there’s a settlement, then it’s all done and dusted. If there’s a conviction (with or without jail time) there’s no way he would be able to keep his position in Formula One Management. It’ll be a lot easier for CVC to get rid of him if he is convicted instead of being let off with a settlement.

            Is there need for jail time? I don’t know. I think money related crimes can easily be settled otherwise (doesn’t mean it should be settled out of court though), it’s not like that person can be a danger to society. Especially in the case of things like tax evasion or in this case…

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 8:03

            Well, yeah @maarten-f1, but this settlement would not be a completely out of court one. It would be a deal where the prosecutors and Bernie agree that the offered sum would be enough to make up for the injustice caused by bribing Gribowsky (BayernLB would have to agree too, and they refused an offer for a settlement out of court to avoid prosecution completely), and the Judge then agrees (or doesn’t).

            As for CVC getting rid of him or not, they will be getting rid of him anyway. Only with a clear conviction it might go a bit more hasty and messy. But rest assured that no big money companies will want to be associated with someone who is guilty of bribery, regardless.

        • puneeth Bharath (@puneethvb) said on 30th July 2014, 6:30

          +1… It will be quite sad to see someone rich buying his way out of potential jail time..

      • JCost (@jcost) said on 30th July 2014, 7:24

        It’s basically buying freedom… who said money can’t buy everything?

        • Pink Peril said on 1st August 2014, 2:13

          I think DavidBR2 was on the money (pun not intended). Given the circumstances and charges of bribery, it is wholly inappropriate for Bernie to be able to pay his way out of this one. He should face court & trial and accept the outcome, whether that be a custodial sentence or not. His age will not preclude him from serving that, just ask Rolf Harris (maybe they can be roomies together).

  3. Bradley Downton (@bradley13) said on 30th July 2014, 0:16

    Bribing himself out of a bribery trial?

    Typical Bernie.

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 30th July 2014, 0:32

      @bradley13 – Which he said he would not do when this possible legal tactic was first brought up some time ago. As you said, typical Bernie.

      • bigwilk (@bigwilk) said on 30th July 2014, 5:34

        Too right! That’s pocket change to him, it’s time Bernie faced the music, and the judge.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 6:18

        yeah, he was denying they were pushing for that when rumored last year @bullmello, I guess it means his defense stance did not work as he hoped it would

        • salcrich said on 30th July 2014, 7:58

          @bascb I think it (his defence strategy) did work – I suspect his denial was all part of the negotiating strategy. I am sure he has always had a figure in mind at which he will consider it a deal well done.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 8:05

            I think you underestimate what being on trial means for his standing in business circles. He already lost a lot of influence in the sport and is pretty much bound to get slowly dropped by CVC. A sale of it is an elegant solution, because then it would be the new owners who replace Bernie, which looks far less messy than having to fire him. But he is gone anyway.

          • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 30th July 2014, 18:56

            @bascb – “But he is gone anyway.”

            Right, I think that the payoff legal tactic was damage control for him to remove any possibility of prison and get this process over with. Damage control does not mean there was no damage done for him though. He is on his way out and probably in the manner you described. In the meantime, he is still the ever present empresario, with no clothes, of F1 effervescence and the world hangs on edge just waiting for his next utterance or proclamation.

  4. tino852 (@tino852) said on 30th July 2014, 0:22

    They finally realized that standing restarts are almost as silly as double points.

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 30th July 2014, 0:35

      @tino852 – Good riddance to an unneeded potentially dangerous not completely thought out stinker of a rule! Best F1 news of the day really.

      • Mike (@mike) said on 30th July 2014, 3:03

        Watching old 1998 races, in Canada Murry Walker was raving about how great the safety car was and how it was keep things moving and didn’t cause a break in the action like a new start would. Brilliant.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 30th July 2014, 0:39

      Some-one here once told me that if I didn’t like F1 I (we) should just leave it and stop writing critical posts because no-one in the FIA or FOM were going to read them let alone take any notice.
      I think they are reading fans comments now and just possibly someone may have realised that if 98% of active fans disagree with Bernie then maybe, just maybe, Bernie is wrong.
      Keep up the good work F1 fanatics and contributors to other blogs.

      • dragoll (@dragoll) said on 30th July 2014, 10:03

        @hohum i think it would be right to assume that no one from the FIA or FOM directly reads fans’ comments. However, issues like fake trumpet exhausts have a way that work its way up to those in power either via teams/paddock personnel or even important business people who are in direct contact with the FIA or FOM. That being said, our combined views make up a small group of fans, and when that small group say the same things as other groups, it tends to start a wave of “popular belief” which then makes its way to the paddock. I do not believe it os any 1 individualnthat can influence fans, however, it is the group themselves the provide this. Thos is keiths’ contribution to F1 and to us.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 31st July 2014, 0:02

          @dragoll, there will be somebody out there who has a job compiling every published mention of F1, and if it is not also done by FOM and FIA then they are even more incompetent and poorly run than we think.
          F1 depends on image and sponsorship and people selling that image to team sponsors and track-owners need hard facts, just as TV broadcasters need to have viewing figures before they spend 10s of $millions to show the races.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 6:37

      Lets hope they drop the double points soon too @tino852. I agree with what @hohum mentions about fans expressing their dislike of these gimmicks and F1 listening. We had Toto Wolff openly admitting that Abu Double was a mistake a couple of weeks back, then they got Hockenheim with a meager crowd and surely all of the negative comments helped convince these guys that another such move like standing restarts, and bringing back Briatore, of all people, would only help deepen their problems.

      Yes, I wholly agree with Bernie when he mentions that “it has to get simpler”. Get rid of complicated rules, drop artificial “spicing up” the action. Start with backing out of the standing restart, ditch Abu Double, ditch rules forcing drivers what tyres to start on, get rid of DRS (or change it to a set amount of uses/race) and the sport will be fine.

      Then the only thing they need to solve is the smaller teams as well as many tracks slowly bleeding to death while ridiculous amounts get wasted on Luca saying he should be winning but failing to do so year after year. And give fans more access to the sporters and sport without everything being stuck away behind an official bland press release and PR people stopping drivers and engineers saying what they want to say.
      Put it all out there on the internet and look at a way to get some revenue from that. Even if not, it will get far more interest because there is so much good to watch – from the last few races we had barrel rolls, cars doing 360s on the straight and catching it to finish the race, superb passes etc, surely those would get watched.

  5. Gareth J (@gjessopp) said on 30th July 2014, 0:37

    Now all he has to do is realise that scrapping Monza is just as ridiculous as standing restarts and we are heading in the right direction. Would also be great if they gave to designers and engineers more to play with in terms of downforce and ingenuity. As soon as they come up with a good idea, it’s banned for the next season. Double diffusers, blown exhausts, F-Ducts, FRIC. It’s ridiculous that there are so many restrictions in place.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 30th July 2014, 0:42

      Right idea, wrong area of development.

    • Breno (@austus) said on 30th July 2014, 0:55

      Actually, FRIC has been around for five years, I think. A theory I saw around here was some teams turned the suspension into an aerodynamic element, and still called it FRIC. Another one was it was a lame way to hold back Mercedes.

      But overall I agree with your thoughts on banning new ideas.

      • anon said on 30th July 2014, 7:01

        Conceptually, the idea has been around in F1 for much longer than that – Minardi tried an interconnected suspension system on the M193 I believe, whilst Tyrrell appear to have tried a similar system on the 023 (the “Hydrolink” suspension).

        • lethalnz said on 30th July 2014, 16:31

          having less down force has made the cars harder to drive,
          so what if they dont go around the track as fast as last year,
          at least now we see cars sliding and loose control not that i want see anyone get hurt, but that is what real driving is about running on the edge,
          you make a mistake your out of here or close to it,
          ever seen Vetel spin in a race, Ham spin in a race before???
          all their own fault.
          i am loving this year racers, best we have ever had in the 40 years i have been watching, you cant beat it….
          only thing now is you have to pay for it to see it live and most of my friends refuse to, hence the fall in numbers of viewers.

  6. Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 30th July 2014, 0:37

    As others have mentioned, how is allowed to end a bribery case with another (bigger) bribe? This is absurd. If this goes ahead, he will forever be a criminal my eyes. (Well, more than he already is, at least)

  7. HoHum (@hohum) said on 30th July 2014, 1:05

    If only I had enough money to hire a basement apartment in Chelsea (UK) and 5 prostitutes for a spanking good time, I might be able to live the millionaire lifestyle by suing newspapers and search-engines.

  8. Michael Brown (@) said on 30th July 2014, 1:15

    I never see the argument for banning team radio. Is it nostalgia?

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 30th July 2014, 1:50

      I think the idea is it makes it more up to the driver. Although there needs to be some sort of radio to communicate which tyres a driver wants and when, not to mention information about safety.

    • mfreire said on 30th July 2014, 3:22

      Banning team radios is a very bad and stupid idea, and hopefully it will never happen. I mean- why would any team or driver want that? Not only is it not entirely safe to not have radios, but they have been used since the mid-80’s and radios should be there because the team should be able to help the drivers in the ways where they don’t know what is happening. That makes the sport almost mindless and utterly stupid. I have an aggressive stance on this matter because I can’t actually believe people at MotorSport Magazine would even have the gall to come up with an idea like that.

      • Becken Lima said on 30th July 2014, 4:46

        Riders on MotoGP deal very well with the lack of radio.

        But to be honest, I love what radio transmissions brings to us in terms of technical insights into the interaction between driver and race engineer/team.

      • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 30th July 2014, 5:15

        Maybe not ban all radio? maybe just have a 5 minutes limit or something like that so that only essential information is transmitted.

      • anon said on 30th July 2014, 7:13

        It was the fact that MotorSport Magazine wanted to ban all forms of communication between the pit wall and the driver – even the basic pit board, which teams still use, was to be banned under their plans.
        It seems quite strange that one of their proposals to “advance” the sport was to force the level of communications technology back to the early 1920’s (Neubauer invented pit boards and the concept of pits to driver communications in 1926).

    • Sven (@crammond) said on 30th July 2014, 9:02

      Completely banning would indeed be completely overexaggerated, and just not possible for the sake of safety. Also pit-stops generally need at least some communication.
      But I can see what triggers this wish, namely all the team-radio where the engineers talk the drivers through, seemingly taking away freedom and responsibility from the driver. However, in my humble opinion it would be a better option to regulate the car-to-pit telemetry, so that the driver knows more and better about the state of tyres, fuel-consumption etc. than the engineer. The driver may then continue to discuss things with the engineer via team-radio or make decisions for his own, the main point is that he (the driver) initially has more data than the engineer, so he can´t be talked through (“hold a gap, safe your tyres”) like it is now anymore.

    • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 30th July 2014, 10:15

      Nostalgia is one of the many weaknesses of man kind. Second only to the neck.

  9. lawrence said on 30th July 2014, 1:24

    As they often say, truth is stranger than fiction, you could also say that irony of the real life is often outdoing the satire literature when it comes to absurdity of it. I mean, this guy is legitimately offering to bribe himself out of the bribe trial and is so up front and direct with it that you’d have to think that he is just being sarcastic, but unfortunately, we’ve seen it too many times, that at this point I’m actually thinking he is dead serious, no matter how utterly absurd it all sounds.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 30th July 2014, 2:36

      Next thing we will hear is how Bernie laid a $2m. bet at 20/1 that he would not be convicted.

      • Mr. T (@mr-t) said on 30th July 2014, 3:49

        (Ok third and final attempt to post this comment)

        Now I would love if this were true. Laying a $2m bet at 20/1 that he will not be convicted will cost Bernie $40m if he walks!

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 31st July 2014, 0:12

          @mr-t, I’ve never laid a bet, should I have said “that he would be convicted”, but I think you know what I meant.

          • Mr. T (@mr-t) said on 31st July 2014, 3:00

            @hohum
            No offence meant – to lay a bet is a special term that means you are making a bet on an outcome not happening eg laying a horse means you are betting that the horse does not win. One way to think of it is that the person who is laying a bet is taking on the role of the bookmaker.

            So if Bernie lays a $2m bet at 20/1 that he will not be convicted then he is in effect acting as a bookmaker.

            Therefore he would suffer a financial loss by having to pay 20x the $2m stake if he was not convicted which I would find very entertaining :D

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 31st July 2014, 9:13

            @mr-t, OK I thought the punter laid the bet and the Bookie kept the book, guess I should have said he took a punt @ 20 to1.

      • David not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard) said on 30th July 2014, 4:19

        @hohum @mr-t Hahahahaha :)

  10. David not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard) said on 30th July 2014, 2:35

    No, let’s see how one can get into the network that the RBR computer is connected to and take the videos from there.

    And using Totem Video Player (GNOME Videos) this time around :)

    • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 30th July 2014, 5:13

      Ha probably is a local network, but I’ve seen those video feeds on TV replays and they always seem quite jerky and low res.

      But I do find it funny they use the cheapest solution possible to get the job done, like any good engineer would!

  11. David not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard) said on 30th July 2014, 2:35

    Let the Silly season……..begin!

  12. wsrgo (@wsrgo) said on 30th July 2014, 3:57

    I wonder at the number of people here who mix up a settlement payment with a bribe. Every civilised legal system has a provision for a settlement in case of civil disputes, the offer pending the plaintiff and the court’s consent of course. Anti-corruption activists don’t target legal systems for having this provision, as far as I am aware.
    Having said that, I do hope that the parties concerned have a strong enough case to reject the settlement. Perhaps the fact that Bernie’s being forced to use his ‘joker’ is a sign of desperation in a situation where things are going badly for him.
    If he had been exonerated on his own accordance, I wouldn’t have said this, but now it seems things aren’t going the way he would like, so I would like to see him behind bars.

  13. BJ (@beejis60) said on 30th July 2014, 5:11

    Wow, look at all the people in the stands at the 89 German GP, as well as all the people standing in the pit lane. I was born too late….

  14. Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 30th July 2014, 6:24

    Happy for standing restarts being scrapped. I think your tweet on the safety played an important role in them noticing. Keep up the tweeting Keith and we may even have double points scrapped at the earliest.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 30th July 2014, 8:06

      @hamilfan It would flatter my ego to think so but I’m sure it didn’t. After all, Ecclestone doesn’t use Twitter because you can’t charge for it, and Whiting doesn’t use Twitter because it’s just ‘pictures of peoples’ breakfasts’.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 30th July 2014, 10:20

        But Toto Wolff most certainly does use it. And while Horner himself doesn’t, Red Bull is clearly keeping a check on social media and what topics are “hot”. Ferrari is probably also keeping an eye on it @keithcollantine.

        I would say its unlikely that your tweets alone made them realize how bad an idea it is, but I think we can be certain that they, and others from almost everyone who covers F1 and tweets about F1 did help.

      • BJ (@beejis60) said on 30th July 2014, 13:33

        @keithcollantine I thought pictures of people’s breakfast was instagram? I don’t use either because I don’t care…

  15. Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 30th July 2014, 6:26

    A bribe for a bribe . Clever Mr. Bernie . what ? 25 mil euros only ? If you want to give him a serious fine apart from a ban , give him say 2 or 4 years earnings . That ought to teach the man .

1 2 3

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.