F1 Fanatic - The Formula 1 Blog » Pat Symonds

Piquet Jnr reveals how ‘Crashgate’ was planned | 2008 F1 season

Keith Collantine — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 09:47:33 +0000

Nelson Piquet Jnr, 2009

Nelson Piquet Jnr has broken his silence over the conspiracy to cause a crash in the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

In an interview with The Times the team’s former driver explained how Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds devised the idea to help Fernando Alonso win the race.

Piquet said:

I could see they were nervous. The room was hot and very tense. I was quite surprised because Flavio is a very assured guy and I had not seen him like that.

“Symonds started talking first. ‘Look, both cars are at the back of the grid,” he told me. “We are in a situation where we are not going to get anywhere in this race unless something extraordinary happens.”

Flavio agreed with him. “It would be a disaster for the team unless something extraordinary happened.”

I just sat there listening because I couldn’t figure out where this was going. They were both very fidgety and the situation was incredibly tense. I don’t think I had said a word by this point.

It was only after five minutes that Flavio made his pitch. ‘Look, the only way we can benefit in any way out here is by getting a safety car on the course at the right moment,’ he said.

I just sat there, looking at them. They both reminded me of what had happened in Germany when someone [Timo Glock] had crashed just after I had pitted and I came second in the race. ‘Do you want to help the team?’ Flavio said. ‘If you crash at the right moment, it could change everything.’
Nelson Piquet Jnr

He admitted: “I did not even consider the morality of it.”

Piquet also claimed that a few days before the race Briatore urged him to sign a contract for 2009 which gave Renault the right to terminate the deal but prevented him from negotiating with other teams.

Piquet remained silent about the conspiracy until August 2009, after he had been dropped by the team. He settled a libel claim with the team earlier this week.

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Briatore and Symonds accept three-year F1 ban in Singapore crash settlement

Keith Collantine — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:22:23 +0000

Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds can return to F1 in 2013

Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds have agreed not to pursue further legal action against the FIA over the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix scandal.

In exchange for the FIA dropping the case the pair have agreed not to have any “operational role” in Formula 1 until the end of 2012, or any other FIA competition until the end of 2011, according to an FIA statement.

The agreement should help bring to an end the row over Nelson Piquet Jnr’s infamous crash in the race, which Briatore and Symonds orchestrated to help Fernando Alonso win the race.

The FIA statement read:

[Briatore and Symonds] have undertaken to abstain from having any operational role in Formula One until 31 December 2012, as well as in all the other competitions registered on the FIA calendars until the end of the 2011 sporting season.

They have also abandoned all publicity and financial measures resulting from the judgement of 5 January 2010, as well as any further action against the FIA on the subject of this affair.

In return, they have asked the FIA to abandon the ongoing appeal procedure, but without the FIA recognising the validity of the criticisms levelled against the WMSC’s decision of 21 September 2009, as well as to waive the right to bring any new proceedings against them on the subject of this affair.
FIA statement

Briatore was originally handed the equivalent of a lifetime ban by the FIA and Symonds was excluded from the sport for a minimum of five years. He succeeded in overturning the decision at the Tribune de Grande Instance in January.

The FIA repeated its criticism of that decision today, saying it “revealed a poor understanding of how the disciplinary procedure before the World Motor Sport Council (WMSC) works.”

However the FIA has made significant changes to how World Motor Sports Council decisions are made, taking the FIA president out of the process.

Although Briatore and Symonds’ punishments have been significantly reduced, the FIA can now at least say that two of the guilty parties have been disciplined, when for a while it looked as through no punishments at all would be handed down for the conspiracy. Nelson Piquet Jnr was offered immunity in exchange for revealing the plot.

But Piquet looks set to remain unpunished. The FIA considers this the end of the matter:

Considering that the judgment of 5 January 2010 concerned only the form and not the substance of the WMSC’s decision of 21 September 2009, and that the undertakings and renunciation of all claims expressed by Mr Flavio Briatore and Mr Pat Symonds are in line with what the WMSC is seeking, the FIA President has considered that it is in the best interests of the FIA not to allow the perpetuation of these legal disputes, which have received a great deal of media coverage and which, regardless of the outcome, are very prejudicial to the image of the FIA and of motor sport, and thus to accept this settlement solution, thereby putting an end to this affair.
FIA statement

Read the full statement here.

2008 Singapore crash scandal

Who is Renault’s “Witness X”?

Keith Collantine — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:01:16 +0000

A fourth member of the Renault team knew about the conspiracy

The FIA has formally published the widely-leaked evidence relating to Renault’s Singapore trial, along with various other documents including a 76-minute recording of the discussion at yesterday’s World Motor Sports Council meeting.

The material can be downloaded from the FIA website.

Although there isn’t much in the documents that hasn’t already been made public, there is one interesting revelation about a fourth person at the team who knew what was going on:

In those additional submissions, Renault F1 referred to the existence of another member of the Renault F1 team (“Witness X”) who, although not a conspirator himself, knew of the conspiracy at the time of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. Renault F1 stated in its submissions of 17 September 2009 that Witness X had confirmed that Mr Briatore had known of the deliberate crash plan before it had been put into effect.

30. Renault F1 submitted that Witness X was a ‘whistleblower’ within its team and that if his identity were to be revealed it may discourage other similarly situated persons to come forward in relation to this or other matters. The FIA considered this argument to have some merit, given that Witness X was said not himself to be a conspirator. However, the FIA considered that this argument had to be balanced against the requirements of the FIA’s investigation and the requirement to put the full facts before the WMSC. The FIA therefore agreed with Renault F1 that the identity of Witness X would be made known to the FIA’s President, and certain of the FIA’s legal advisers only. Renault also agreed to put forward Witness X for interview by one of the FIA’s external counsel, Mr Paul Harris. To protect his identity Witness X is not identified in this decision.

31. With Renault’s cooperation, Witness X was subjected to detailed interview and examination. The interview established to the satisfaction of the FIA’s legal advisers that Renault F1’s description of the evidence of Witness X in Renault F1’s written submissions of 17 September 2009 was accurate. As a result of the interview, the FIA put a number of additional questions to Renault F1’s lawyers.

On 19 September 2009, Renault F1 made a third and final set of written submissions. In those submissions, Renault F1 stated as follows: “Renault F1 has concluded that the following had knowledge of the conspiracy to cause a safety car: Nelson Piquet Junior, Pat Symonds, Flavio Briatore and [Witness X]. [Witness X] was told of the idea suggested by Nelson Piquet Junior by Mr Symonds, whilst in the presence of Mr Briatore. [Witness X] objected to the idea. He did not know the plan was to be carried into effect until the crash happened. As a result of the evidence, including Mr Piquet’s admission, Mr Symond’s responses and [Witness X’s] evidence, Renault F1 concluded that they and Mr Briatore must have known about the conspiracy.”

32. When the FIA’s advisers interviewed Witness X, he expressly confirmed that Mr Briatore was involved in the conspiracy because Witness X had been personally present at a meeting shortly after qualifying on Saturday 27 September 2008 when Mr Symonds had mentioned the possibility of a crash plan to Mr Briatore. The FIA’s advisers were confident that Witness X himself played no active role in the conspiracy and that, indeed, he had objected to it and sought to distance himself from it.

This raises several questions – first of all, who is the mystery ‘Witness X’? A race engineer? A mechanic? One of the people who questioned Alonso’s strategy of Pat Symonds on the pitwall during the race? (see pages 46-63 of the evidence dossier).

Furthermore, why was Nelson Piquet Jnr’s evidence needed if this witness had already come forward and the FIA had access to the incriminating Renault telemetry? And why was this witness allowed to conceal their identity while Piquet’s identity was published?

Please share your thoughts below on this or anything else in the evidence supplied by the FIA. If you’re listening to the WMSC recording you can hear Fernando Alonso’s testimony at 15:48 and Nelson Piquet Jnr’s from 17:59.

Update: FIA vice-president for Mohammed bin Sulayem has described the Renault verdict as being ‘negotiated’. He said: “We did our negotiations before and everybody is happy with the result. The verdict is fair and everyone is a winner.” Is he admitting the FIA verdict was a sop to Renault? Incidentally, Sulayem crashed a Renault F1 car at a demonstration run earlier this year.

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Nelson Piquet Jnr wants F1 return

Keith Collantine — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:11:02 +0000

Piquet kept Briatore's scheme quiet as long as it suited him

Nelson Piquet Jnr has issued a statement following the Renault verdict in which he tries to wash his hands of the conspiracy.

Rather optimistically, he sets out his case for why he feels he should get an F1 drive in 2010:

I can only hope that a team will recognise how badly I was stifled at Renault and give me an opportunity to show what I promised in my career in F3 and GP2. What can be assured is that there will be no driver in Formula One as determined as me to prove myself.

First, it’s clear that there was indeed something rotten at Renault in 2008, probably in 2009 as well, and possibly before then, too.

Given that Piquet was asked to put his life in jeopardy in the hope it would help Fernando Alonso win a race, it’s no stretch of the imagination to conclude he did not get the equipment or support he needed to prove himself while at the team. This is, after all, the man who finished within 12 points of Lewis Hamilton in GP2 in 2006, with four wins to Hamilton’s five.

So perhaps Piquet hasn’t had a fair chance to do justice to his talents in F1 yet.

Does that mean a team should snap him up for 2010? Absolutely not.

However vulnerable his mental state was at the time (see below for his full statement) it does not excuse the fact that what he, Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds conspired to do was an abhorrent act of cheating with contemptible disregard for the safety of others.

The only reason Piquet doesn’t have a punishment comparable to that of Briatore or Symonds is because the FIA offered him immunity.

The fact it took him nearly 12 months to own to up to what he had done, only doing so once Renault had finally fired him, is a reminder of his own vested interest in going along with the scheme: protecting his place in F1.

He does not deserve to get that place back.

Nelson Piquet Jnr statement:

I am relieved that the FIA investigation has now been concluded. Those now running the Renault F1 Team took the decision, as I did, that it is better that the truth be known and accept the consequences. The most positive thing to come from bringing this to the attention of the FIA is that nothing like it will ever happen again.

I bitterly regret my actions to follow the orders I was given. I wish every day that I had not done it.

I don’t know how far my explanation will go to making people understand because for many being a racing driver is an amazing privilege, as it was for me. All I can tell you is that my situation at Renault turned into a nightmare. Having dreamed of being a Formula One driver and having worked so hard to get there, I found myself at the mercy of Mr Briatore. His true character, which had previously only been known to those he had treated like this in the past, is now known.

Mr Briatore was my manager as well as the team boss, he had my future in his hands but he cared nothing for it. By the time of the Singapore GP he had isolated me and driven me to the lowest point I had ever reached in my life. Now that I am out of that situation I cannot believe that I agreed to the plan, but when it was put to me I felt that I was in no position to refuse. Listening now to Mr Briatore’s reaction to my crash and hearing the comments he has made to the press over the last two weeks it is clear to me that I was simply being used by him then to be discarded and left to ridicule.

I have had to learn some very difficult lessons over the last 12 months and reconsider what is valuable in life. What has not changed is my love for Formula One and hunger to race again. I realise that I have to start my career from zero. I can only hope that a team will recognise how badly I was stifled at Renault and give me an opportunity to show what I promised in my career in F3 and GP2. What can be assured is that there will be no driver in Formula One as determined as me to prove myself.

As my final words on this matter, I would like to repeat that I am so sorry to those who work in Formula One (including the many good people at Renault) the fans and the governing body. I do not expect this to be forgiven or forgotten but at least now people can draw their conclusions based upon what really happened.
Nelson Piquet Jnr

Renault Singapore crash controversy

No punishment for Briatore or Symonds?

Keith Collantine — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:50:24 +0000

An (un-bylined) article in the Daily Express suggests Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds may go unpunished for their role in the Renault crash scandal.

Having left Renault, Briatore and Symonds are no longer represented by a licence holder, and so cannot be punished:

Although the Council have unlimited power when it comes to imposing a penalty against Renault, they are now powerless to act against Briatore and Symonds, despite the severity of the case.

It claims the World Motor Sports Council plans to change the rules so it can penalise individuals in similar cases in the future.

This was also the case in 2007 during the ‘Spygate’ enquiry, when the FIA was unable to punish Nigel Stepney after he had been dismissed by Ferrari. Instead it warned teams against hiring him:

As Mr Stepney is not a licence-holder of the FIA, no formal action may be taken against him under the International Sporting Code (though the FIA is co-operating with the Italian police, who are investigating Mr Stepney’s actions). As a matter of good order, the FIA recommends to its licensees that they do not professionally collaborate with Mr Stepney without conducting appropriate due diligence regarding his suitability for involvement in international motor sport. This recommendation stands until 1 July 2009.

Under the circumstances, it’s surprising they didn’t address the sooner. We can expect a similar announcement regarding Briatore and Symonds after the WMSC hearing on Monday.

Other questions are being asked today about the FIA’s handling of the matter. It has now emerged it was first brought to the FIA’s attention by Nelson Piquet Snr at last year’s Brazilian Grand Prix almost 11 months ago.

The delay in prosecuting the case was because the FIA required a statement from Nelson Piquet Jnr, and did not receive one until July 30 of this year. Was this because Piquet waited, or because the FIA didn’t offer him immunity until July? If the latter, why did they wait so long?

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Fernando Alonso should renounce his Singapore Grand Prix ‘win’

Keith Collantine — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 01:00:51 +0000

Fernando Alonso's Singapore 'win' is tainted

F1 has been dogged by scandal after scandal in recent years.

In 2005 we had the Indianapolis farce, two years later brought the ‘spygate’ row, last year was dominated by Mosley’s sadomasochism scandal, and the first half of this year was taken up with the budget cap crisis.

But F1′s latest row, over Renault ordering Nelson Piquet Jnr to crash during the Singapore Grand Prix, is surely the worst yet. Indeed one writer has already called it the worst act of cheating in any sport.

I won’t claim a sufficiently encyclopaedic knowledge of sport to make that claim, although it’s gained some favourable responses on Twitter. But it’s hard to think of a worse example from F1′s history.

There have, of course, been other occasions where drivers have crashed or spun on purpose. Alain Prost hit Ayrton Senna in 1989, and Senna hit Prost back in 1990. Michael Schumacher hit Damon Hill in 1994 and Jacques Villeneuve in 1997.

Like Piquet’s crash, these all involved drivers risking the lives of themselves and others, though admittedly to varying degrees – Senna piled into Prost at around 150mph, Schumacher was doing rather less when he took out Hill.

But what sets the Renault case apart is the offensive cynicism of a team ordering one driver to risk injury or worse in a crash to benefit his team mate.

It was not just Piquet at risk – but spectators, marshals and other drivers. The impact showered debris across the track – and recent accidents have left us in no doubt of the terrible risks that presents.

It’s one thing to have a team like McLaren being caught using a rival team’s confidential information. That’s obviously wrong and must be punished – but it doesn’t put anyone’s life at risk.

The FIA may have offered Piquet immunity from punishment but he should not be immune from criticism. Renault’s plan was disgusting but his willingness to go along with it in the hope of promoting his career was cowardly.

It raises all sorts of questions. Was anyone besides Briatore, Symonds and Piquet involved? Had Renault, or any other team, tried this sort of thing before? Have they done since?

And given the manner in which he scored this ‘victory’, should Fernando Alonso now publicly deny the credit for it? I think he should – regardless of whether he knew about it or not (and so far there is no evidence that indicates he was aware of it).

A two-times world champion has no need of tainted triumphs handed to him in a corrupt fashion. He proved that well enough with his victory at Fuj in the very next race.

In 2006 he told the world he no longer considered F1 a sport after being handed a joke of a penalty by the Monza stewards. Now it’s time for Alonso to tell us his no longer considers Singapore 2008 one of his Grand Prix wins.

Renault Singapore crash controversy

David Richards to take over at Renault?

Keith Collantine — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:10:47 +0000

Much of the reaction to the departures of Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds from Renault have so far been focussed on what it says about the Singaproe crash scandal.

But the sudden loss of the managing director and director of engineering means the team are faced with a serious operational problem – assuming, of course, they aren’t thrown out of the championship on Monday.

According to an article on Speed TV, David Richards was spotted at Renault’s Enstone factory recently, leading to suggestions that the Prodrive boss could be about to step in.

Richards briefly ran the team when it was still known as Benetton. He took over from Briatore, who had set up a company to supply customer Renault-derived engines. Richards was replaced by Rocco Benetton later the following year.

Could this prove a way for Prodrive to finally break into F1? Richards has made two bids to enter F1 with his team in the last three years. On the first occasion his application was accepted by the FIA but withdrawn after the governing body failed to introduce rules allowing customer cars.

Prodrive were also among the unsuccessful applicants for a place on the F1 grid in 2010, possibly because the team preferred Mercedes engines over the FIA’s supply of Cosworths. The company also looked at buying the Honda assets at the end of last year.

Is Richards the right man for Renault? Have your say in the comments.

Update: I’ve just heard from a source of my own that Richards was at the Renault factory today.

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Briatore and Symonds step down as Renault accepts Singapore crash charge

Keith Collantine — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:46:28 +0000

Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds have left Renault

The Renault F1 team has confirmed it will not contest the FIA’s charges against the team over the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

This surprising development is tantamount to an admission that Nelson Piquet Jnr was instructed to crash to help Fernando Alonso win the race.

Renault has also revealed its managing director Flavio Briatore and director of engineering: Pat Symonds have left the team. Only yesterday Symonds had been offered immunity from prosecution by the FIA in exchange for revealing further evidence.

Update: New Renault documents leaked today – see below.

A statement from Renault read:

The ING Renault F1 Team will not dispute the recent allegations made by the FIA concerning the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

It also wishes to state that its managing director, Flavio Briatore and its executive director of engineering, Pat Symonds, have left the team.

Before attending the hearing before the FIA World Motor Sport Council in Paris on 21 September 2009, the team will not make any further comment.

The first question now is how the World Motor Sports Council will choose to punish the team on Monday.

At the very least, Renault must be stripped of their win at Singapore last year. That could mean Williams driver Nico Rosberg being promoted from second place to be handed his first F1 win. (Update: See Hakka’s comment on why this won’t happen)

It’s impossible to ignore the ramifications of what happened. One indirect consequence of Piquet’s crash was Ferrari’s botched pit stop for Felipe Massa, which cost him a likely race win. That could even have changed the outcome of the world championship.

However even if the points from Singapore are re-distributed, Lewis Hamilton will remains the 2008 drivers’ champion and Ferrari the 2008 constructors’ champions.

But the full scale of the punishment could be far greater than just the loss of a race victory. We could be looking at a fine comparable to McLaren’s $100m penalty in 2007, or a one-year ban such as that handed down to the Toyota rally team in 2002.

What do you think should be the consequences for Renault? Will they be racing at next weekend’s second Singapore Grand Prix?

Update: The Daily Mail has leaked the FIA documents on Renault in full. Here’s links to all of them:

Statement of Nelson Piquet Jnr to FIA
Supplementary Statement of Nelson Piquet Jnr to FIA
Letter from Lars Osterlind to Max Mosley
Report of Stewards’ investigation into the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix
2008 Singapore Grand Prix Transcript of Extracts from Renault file “everything_08R15_Race_2008 192002”
Telemetry 1
Telemetry 2
Telemetry 3
Telemetry 4
Telemetry 5
Partial track map
Recovery vehicle locations
Letter from Flavio Briatore to Nelson Piquet Snr
Letter from Pierre de Coninck
Invitation to an extraordinary meeting of the WMSC

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Should the FIA have offered Pat Symonds immunity – and will he take it?

Keith Collantine — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 23:37:00 +0000

Pat Symonds will go unpunished if he reveals further evidence

A surprising and quite telling development in the FIA’s investigation into the Renault Singapore crash came today as the governing body extended its offer of immunity to Pat Symonds.

The clear implication is the FIA believe Symonds know more than he has told them so far – and suspicion will inevitably fall on the next man up the chain, Flavio Briatore.

Already there have been various comments on this site and others suggesting Mosley has it in for Briatore. As James Allen wrote recently:

This situation offers the opportunity for outgoing FIA president Max Mosley to settle a few scores with Briatore before he leaves office in two months time. Briatore has been in Mosley’s cross-hairs for many years, since writing an open letter of no confidence in the FIA president in 1994.

Perhaps, but if this is the case then why did Mosley pass up an opportunity to exact his revenge two years ago when Renault were found guilty of using McLaren’s intellectual property, but went unpunished?

Further information about the timing to the investigation came to light today with the publication of a letter from Flavio Briatore to Nelson Piquet (Snr) dated July 28th. It included this passage:

I was extremely shocked to learn from Mathieu Michel, and from Bernie [Ecclestone], as a matter of confirmation, that you would have declared that Nelsinho was asked by Renault to cause an accident in the 13th lap in the Grand Prix of Singapore, 2008.
Flavio Briatore

Given the timing of the letter, should we be more doubtful of the Piquets’ position? Prisoner Monkeys offered an interesting alternative take in the comments yesterday:

The FIA may not be going after Briatore. They may no longer trust Piquet; his story changes with each re-telling. Firstly it was that they were going to stage an accident. Then they were going to stage an accident and even picked out a corner. Now Piquet Snr. has said Alonso had to have known about it.

Piquet is trying to bring Briatore down, to ruin him, and he’s trying to get the FIA to do that. If both Piquet and Symonds testify and their stories conflict, one of them is clearly lying. And Piquet has more reason to do so.

Whatever the FIA’s reasons for offering immunity in this fashion may be, the decision to do so raises difficult questions. Should Piquet and Symonds be immune from punishment just because the roles of others who may have been involved has not yet come to light?

While ‘plea bargains’ increase the speed of the process of gathering information and holding a trial, they may encourage guilty parties to work the system to their advantage in order to shift the balance of punishment towards innocent or, at least, less guilty parties. (I’m sure any lawyers who may be reading can enlighten us further on their benefits and shortcomings.)

We will likely only understand the FIA’s purpose in offering Symonds immunity when the details of the case become clear next week. Why do you think they have done it? And how should he respond?

Renault Singapore crash controversy

Piquet-Renault scandal: more new evidence and complaints about leaks

Keith Collantine — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:24:34 +0000

Flavio Briatore has gone on the attack against former driver Nelson Piquet Jnr

Since Nelson Piquet Jnr’s statement leaked online yesterday the story has exploded, commanding back-page coverage on many of Britain’s daily papers and dominating the build-up to the Italian Grand Prix.

There are accusations of blackmail, complaints about the media’s handling of the story, more material appearing online and statements flying around. Here’s a quick summary of how the story has developed in the last 24 hours.

Pat Symonds

New material has emerged which gives further insight into the FIA hearings. In particular, data from Piquet’s car showing how the accident happened, and transcripts from his radio communications and the subsequent FIA enquiry.

The telemetry leaves little doubt that Piquet intentionally lost control of his car by applying an excessive amount of throttle at the exit of the corner.

The article also claims that during the FIA interviews, conducted at the Belgian Grand Prix weekend two weeks ago, Pat Symonds refused to answer several questions about whether they had decided to create a crash. It also says the stewards felt Flavio Briatore’s reaction to being told of the investigation by them was unusual.

Renault threatens legal action against Piquet

Today the ING Renault F1 Team and its Managing Director Flavio Briatore personally, wish to state that they have commenced criminal proceedings against Nelson Piquet Junior and Nelson Piquet Senior in France concerning the making of false allegations and a related attempt to blackmail the team into allowing Mr Piquet Jnr to drive for the remainder of the 2009 season. The matter will also be referred to the Police in the UK.
Renault statement

Renault has announced it is taking legal action against Nelson Piquet Jnr. This in itself may not be all it seems, as Joe Saward explains:

This is not possible and Renault lawyers in Paris would know this, which makes the statement seem very odd indeed. [...]

In French law it is not possible for a private individual or a company to commence criminal proceedings. All they can do is to claim that a crime has been committed and ask the authorities to investigate.

Despite Symonds’ reported reluctance to answer questions, Briatore is confident about his case against Piquet and representation to the World Motor Sports Council:

You know what? Whatever happens, if someone goes against the rules, they go against the rules. If I tell you to go rob a bank – afterwards, you decide whether to rob the bank or not.

I don’t feel I have any responsibility, and we don’t feel we have done absolutely anything [wrong]. In the case of Piquet we go to the World Council. But the fact already that we have put a criminal plan to Piquet is because we have enough confidence to be successful – the team and myself.
Flavio Briatore

Max Mosley’s take

Autosport have published an interview with Max Mosley in which he suggests Renault could be thrown out of the 2008 world championship:

Question: What could be the penalty if they guilty?

Mosley: It could be anything up to disqualification. Because that’s what’s set out in the code. Disqualification means you are out, finished.

Question. From the 2008 championship?

Mosley: Out. Total. Exclusion forever, gone, finished. That’s the worst that could happen, but don’t for a moment get the impression I’m saying that would happen or will happen. That is the worst that could happen.

He also makes some very interesting remarks about the reaction to McLaren’s $100m fine two years ago.

Nelson Piquet Jnr’s statement

Nelson Piquet Jnr has put out a statement this evening saying:

Regarding the current FIA investigation, I confirm that I have co-operated fully and honestly with the sport’s governing body. Because I am telling the truth I have nothing to fear, whether from the ING Renault Team or Mr Briatore and whilst I am well aware of the power and influence of those being investigated, and the vast resources at their disposal, I will not be bullied again into making a decision I regret.

I have every confidence in the FIA investigation and World Motor Sport Council and I will be making no further comment until the conclusion of the hearing of 21 September 2009.
Nelson Piquet Jnr

It has also emerged that Mosley offered Piquet immunity from punishment in exchange for revealing the details of the plan, just as the McLaren drivers were during ‘spygate’ two years ago.

FIA and FOTA condemn leaks

Both the governing body and the teams’ association has criticised the publication of Nelson Piquet Jnr’s statement yesterday. It first appeared on F1SA (which, at the time of writing, appears to have gone down) and later other sites, including this one. Mosley explained why he was unhappy about the leak and vowed to prevent it happening again in future:

That is actually very unfortunate because it is just one side of the story. We are quite genuinely curious as to how that happened. Next time, when we send out to 20 or 30 people, we will probably arrange it in such a way that we can tell who is leaking stuff.
Max Mosley

The Formula 1 Teams’ Association, of which Renault is a member, echoed his views:

All parties to the dispute should have the right to a fair hearing carried out in private and not in the public arena, which is producing adverse publicity damaging to the corporate image and credibility of Formula One.
FOTA

I don’t agree with these views. Greater transparency can only be a good thing for the FIA, particularly when so many of its recent verdicts have drawn criticism for inconsistent judgements and unclear rules.

As for the suggestions the leaks are unfair because it only shows one side of the story, I am entirely happy to publish Renault’s version of events and I’m sure every F1 fan would like to read it.

Until then, I hope we can spend the next few days with our attention where it should be: on the Italian Grand Prix. If you haven’t made your predictions yet, head over here: Enter your Italian Grand Prix predictions