Favourite Conspiracy Theories?
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
20th August 2010, 21:06 at 9:06 pmParticipant
I was reading this ridiculous article…
Was thinking how many insane conspiracy theories we get in F1 now. Anyone think of any others?
21st August 2010, 8:55 at 8:55 am
I hate conspiracy theories. Part of me tolerates them as they make F1 a little more bonkers but I seriously think they’re all rubbish. Although I did think Piquet crashing deliberately was another absurd theory…
Anyway my favourite ones to hate are –
Spa 2008. The stewards just messed up. It was not an attempt to hand Felipe the crown and drive Lewis Hamilton away from the sport.
Brazil 2008- Timo was not in cahoots with Lewis. By not pitting he actually threw Massa a life line but it just didn’t work out.
Brazil 2007- weird things happen with gearboxes. Bernie didn’t press a magic button to kill it.
Ferrari’s blog post – Mad Max and the FIA attempting to kill off the manufacturers. I really nevern liked Max and I do think he had his own agenda sometimes but it was just a bit of a stretch.
Martin favouring Jenson over Lewis. He may have a slight personal favourite, or maybe he’s just trying to make Jenson feel settled in but he wants either of his drivers to win. He’s not daft to deny Hamilton’s talent.
Mclaren deliberatly ballsing pitstops all year to help Jenson and putting Lewis on the wrong strategy. Startegies go wrong. Lewis has a very different driving style, at Aus it was still very early with this year’s tyres and refuelling so it was still guess work.
21st August 2010, 14:26 at 2:26 pmParticipant
To be honest I always thought the 2008 conspiracy was about making the championship closer, just as in 1994. I don’t like the theories but after the ludicrous (not to mention unprecedented) penalties on Hamilton and Bourdais at Fuji place I really had to wonder what was going on.
The ones I hated most were:
1) Kovalainen let Hamilton by in Germany the same way Massa did this year. Kovi was likely told to get out of his way, but as the rest of the race showed, they were in a different league in terms of pace (unlike Alonso and Massa a few weeks back).
2) The FIA always favoured Ferrari. Yes, they have a special relationship and rights (like the technical veto) other teams don’t have, but a lot of times when things went Ferrari’s way it was because it closed up the championship, not because it was Ferrari who were behind. Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t remember anyone protesting an advantage Ferrari had and then seeing it dismissed to keep them ahead?
3) Ferrari sabotaged Irvine’s title bid in 1999 because he was leaving the team. I don’t buy into this one; sure, they wouldn’t have had the #1 on their car the next year, but they wouldn’t have it if Irvine lost anyway; they would still have the glory of carrying the WDC to victory. It would be a very un-Ferrari thing to do to throw away a first championship in many years for the sake of who would be the winner.
4) Hamilton was and always has been #1 at McLaren. Dennis definitely had a greater emotional preference for Lewis, but to sabotage a proven double-champion’s chances on a rookie who might not last the distance? And when you have only one upgrade, do you give it to the slower driver when even the other one hasn’t got a shot at the title? Daft.
Basically 1) and 2) are saying the FIA/Bernie do interfere with things to make it closer, and that’s my favourite theory because I believe it a little.
21st August 2010, 17:36 at 5:36 pmParticipant
Agree with them all Icthyes. The penalties in 2008 were certainly to make the title closer, especially the Bourdais one. Most ridiculous penalty I’ve ever witnessed.
21st August 2010, 17:57 at 5:57 pmParticipant
I have my own about Red Bull in Hungary this year. It really wouldn’t surprise me if Vettel had been told to hold up Alonso after the safety car – and he messed up/the team told him to stay further behind mark than he should without realising the rule, which is ultimately why he lost the race. Its not favouritism of any sort, just trying to get a comfortable 1-2 but it went wrong!.
With regards to the more traditional theories – I do think that 95 springs to mind that Schumacher had an illegal car etc. The reason it springs to mind as being rubbish is because even if he did have it on his car, i’m 99% certain that all the other cars had something similar on theirs. F1 is all about breaking/pushing the rules and not getting caught!
Its such a shame to see grandprix.com becoming so terrible. I was a long time user over there before Saward leaving and it becoming just another F1 news site!
21st August 2010, 17:59 at 5:59 pmParticipant
Although there is one penalty that springs to mind – against Montoya in 03. I have seen replay after replay and still don’t understand why he was given a penalty at Indianapolis (I think) which ruined his title bid
21st August 2010, 18:23 at 6:23 pmParticipant
I think the ridiculous penalties in 2008 (and those dished out to Schumacher in 1994 for that matter too!) were designed solely to ensure that the title lasted till the last race of the season (which it did!).
I remember someone suggesting in 2007 that Hamilton’s mysterious gearbox failure/blip/missed gear was all part of a deal between Ron Dennis and Mad Max to ensure that McLaren didn’t win the WDC in 2007 in exchange for not getting kicked out of the championship. Hmmm….
21st August 2010, 18:31 at 6:31 pmParticipant
@ sw6569, you forget the rule in the early 2000s was that Montoya could be given a penalty for “driving with intent to beat Schumacher” or at least thats what it looked like :P
My favourite conspiracy, which I still kinda of believe, was that Alonso was given that grid drop at Monza 2006 to remove the only serious threat to Schumacher on the weekend he announced his retirment.
Its worrying though how the Glock conspiracy gained traction. I was sat talking to a randomer in a pub watching the football about a year and a half ago and I mentioned I was an F1 fan. Basically the first thing he said was “So do you reckon that whats his name let Hamilton past? it looked a bit iffy to me” That Joe public is that suspicious about F1 is a shame, but I guess kind of inevitable with people who don’t follow the sport can’t be expected to understand its complexities and pychodrama.
Other conspiracy theories more believable than the Glock one:
Michael Schumacher was actually a robot sent from the future to terminate the popularity of F1 with casual fans in the early 2000s
Ferrari is secretly run by alien lizards
The moon landings were faked at the Shanghai International Circuit since it was the only place on earth dull and featureless enough to be mistaken for the moon
21st August 2010, 18:40 at 6:40 pmParticipant
“I remember someone suggesting in 2007 that Hamilton’s mysterious gearbox failure/blip/missed gear was all part of a deal between Ron Dennis and Mad Max to ensure that McLaren didn’t win the WDC in 2007 in exchange for not getting kicked out of the championship. Hmmm….”
Nice theory but the only problem there is that Hamilton was going to win the title in China before he slid into the grasp of San Ganchao on the way into the pits.
22nd August 2010, 17:42 at 5:42 pmParticipant
some good stuff there
my two are
irvine, monza 1999, where he wasnt competive, went there to see him win, but he was so far off the pace it was unreal, still think those french and german characters had something to do with it
met irvine a few years back in a lift at the airport, wish I had of asked him bout it(think the reason for it not entering the old brain was because by then I,d gone off him so much as a person I coulnt really be bothered with him)
also, still maintain our niges tyre was sabbotaged by an aborigianal blow dart from the inside of the hairpin, cos the powers that be didnt want the whinging moustascheod brummie to win the championship (glad he finally did mind)
sbl on tour
22nd August 2010, 23:16 at 11:16 pmParticipant
My favourite one has to be that the FIA conspired to prevent Lewis Hamilton from winning the 2007 World Championship because they didn’t want McLaren to win after the Stepney incident and the subsequent punishment. Halfway through the Brazilian Grand Prix, Hamilton suffered an inexplicable electrical fault that cut the power to his car whilst he was catching the leaders. Although McLaren were able to get the system back up and running, the tinfoil hats among us claimed that the FIA had done this by using a targeted electromagnetic charge designed to fry Hamilton’s gearbox. This was proved absolutely impossible because a) McLaren would notice, b) it would be impossible to accurately target the gearbox of a car travelling 300km/h and c) anyone attempting to would have to be standing right next to Hamilton. Nevertheless, I’ve seen some absolute morons claim that it’s completely true … it seems that every time a race result is not what someone thinks it should have been, there is some dark conspiracy manipulating it.
23rd August 2010, 22:28 at 10:28 pmParticipant
The simple theory that all of the controversies and scandals, e.g. break-away sport threats last year, crash-gate, etc. are pre-arranged hoaxes between the teams and Ecclestone to get Formula One onto television news and the front of the sport pages in newspapers to drum up publicity.
30th August 2010, 13:42 at 1:42 pmParticipant
I, along with about everyone else, joked about Singapore 2008 being a conspiracy… too bad we were all right..
31st August 2010, 5:48 at 5:48 amMember
You have to hand it to F1 though, some of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories in the sport have turned out to be true..
I remember first hearing the rumors about crashgate during Spa last year, and thinking ‘hah, no way’..
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.