Renault Cahoots?

Dan Fielden · 16 Nov 2010, 17:34 (Ref:2791723)

O.K Guys, Just a food for thought, Im not saying this is the case but we all love a conspiracy theory dont we.

Abu Dhabi, Hamilton stuck behind Kubica and Alonso Stuck behind Petrov.

Yes its a grand prix and no driver should allow another through and kubica and petrov were sensational at making their renault's as wide as the Abu Dhabi tarmac, but was this a clever strategic nudge from red-bull to Eric Boullier to get Kubica to qualify 11th and go long.

The whole petriv pitting during the safety car does punch a big whole in this theory and i admit it's a long shot, but our mate Lewis certainly felt the same, (when tensions were high

) but what do we think guys.

Conspiracy ?

Your thoughts?

ASCII Man · 16 Nov 2010, 17:43 (Ref:2791729)

I think the only conspiracy is that Red Bull put Webber out there on the wrong strategy on purpose to mislead Ferrari, and it worked.

Two flies with one stone.

Well played, to be honest.

Super Hans · 16 Nov 2010, 20:06 (Ref:2791797)

It doesn't matter if Red Bull asked them to defend or not as far as I'm concerned. They're supposed to do so anyway. If one of them had punted Alonso or Hamilton off then you might have a point, but they didn't.

TrapezeArtist · 16 Nov 2010, 21:45 (Ref:2791842)

Conspiracy theory gone mad!

Watch the Petrov - Alonso battle again. Petrov hardly made any attempts are real defending: he just drove as fast as he could. There were gaps big enough for an artic to drive through, but it would have to have been a very fast artic! Petrov surprised me by being much neater and more reliable than I expected. Alonso surprised me by failing to get past, but once he got rattled it was little surprise that he went off to visit so many of the obscure corners of the estate.

It was much the same with Kubica - Hamilton, except that Lulu didn't lose his cool.

Ralf's Girl · 16 Nov 2010, 22:04 (Ref:2791859)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Fielden

OYes its a grand prix and no driver should allow another through and kubica and petrov were sensational at making their renault's as wide as the Abu Dhabi tarmac, but was this a clever strategic nudge from red-bull to Eric Boullier to get Kubica to qualify 11th and go long.

Robert Kubica really doesn't strike me as the sort of driver who'd sign up for that kind of thing.

I think there probably was an element of Renault wanting their engines to be behind both titles, but ultimately it's the job of any driver to defend his position from whoever is behind him (look at Alguersuari with Webber, he didn't exactly go easy on him because the instinct as a driver must be to defend). And in the case of Petrov, for the most part he wasn't actually under that much pressure - Alonso just didn't seem to be that close to him for most of the time he was behind. Alonso was massively disappointing on Sunday; he needed to make things happen to win the title and he just wasn't quick enough.

TrapezeArtist · 16 Nov 2010, 22:10 (Ref:2791863)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralf's Girl

Alonso was massively disappointing on Sunday; he needed to make things happen to win the title and he just wasn't quick enough.

I think he started off assuming it was a foregone conclusion. When he realised it wasn't going to plan, he panicked.

Ralf's Girl · 16 Nov 2010, 22:12 (Ref:2791866)

Quite possibly. I expected better from him, though (although I'm not disappointed to see him lose). Ferrari have said themselves that they underestimated the difficulty of passing Petrov and Rosberg, which was foolish in the extreme.

phoenix · 16 Nov 2010, 22:17 (Ref:2791869)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Fielden

was this a clever strategic nudge from red-bull to Eric Boullier to get Kubica to qualify 11th and go long.

I think it would be almost impossible for a driver to go out and guarantee to qualify in any specific grid position - other than last maybe.

In Q2, Kubica was 0.122 seconds slower than Petrov but only 0.003 seconds faster than Kobayashi. Aiming to be slower than Petrov by, say, 0.060 and faster than Kobayashi by a similar margin would be, I would say, impossible to judge.

End of any conspiracy theory as far as I am concerned.

phoenix · 16 Nov 2010, 22:18 (Ref:2791871)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

Two flies with one stone.

Or 'birds' - in the English language...

**Woolley** · 16 Nov 2010, 22:30 (Ref:2791880)

It's apparently already a slow off-season and it's only two days since the last race...

sizzle · 17 Nov 2010, 08:29 (Ref:2791987)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Conspiracy theory gone mad!

Watch the Petrov - Alonso battle again. Petrov hardly made any attempts are real defending: he just drove as fast as he could. There were gaps big enough for an artic to drive through, but it would have to have been a very fast artic! Petrov surprised me by being much neater and more reliable than I expected. Alonso surprised me by failing to get past, but once he got rattled it was little surprise that he went off to visit so many of the obscure corners of the estate.

It was much the same with Kubica - Hamilton, except that Lulu didn't lose his cool.

That is the truth of the whole matter.

And Woolley your dead right

steve_r · 17 Nov 2010, 09:16 (Ref:2792003)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woolley

It's apparently already a slow off-season and it's only two days since the last race...

For goodness sake...

**Born Racer** · 17 Nov 2010, 10:48 (Ref:2792034)

Well Lewis made what I thought was a jokey comment about the Renaults, and Lee McKenzie asked something along the lines of if he was insinuating they were colluding with Red Bull, to which Hamilton said no.

Didn't stop the BBC from running the title 'Lewis Hamilton accuses Renault of hold-up tactics': http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/9188433.stm

Probably only available for UK viewers.

Ralf's Girl · 17 Nov 2010, 11:50 (Ref:2792056)

Any criticism of the Renault drivers is only valid if they were a lap down - in that situation if they held up Red Bull's rivals they could be accused of doing it deliberately to help their partner. In reality, holding up the drivers behind is precisely what Kubica and Petrov were supposed to do - it's called defending your position. Although it would have been interesting to see what might have happened had one of them had a Red Bull behind them...

Dan Fielden · 17 Nov 2010, 19:59 (Ref:2792250)

It was a bit of a joke to be fair and i thought i'd made that clear at the beggining of my post but many apologies to Woolley, Sizzle, Steve r and Phoenix for making you read such garbage.

pinch of salt guys, im educated enough to know this wasn't the case

Teretonga · 17 Nov 2010, 20:13 (Ref:2792254)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

I think the only conspiracy is that Red Bull put Webber out there on the wrong strategy on purpose to mislead Ferrari, and it worked.

Two flies with one stone.

Well played, to be honest.

Catching flies?

Well......
'Man who catch fly with chopsticks can accomplish anything....'
(Mr Miyagi, Karate Kid, 1984)

No I don't think there was a conspiracy....even if Kubica can catch flies with chopsticks.....

White flag man · 17 Nov 2010, 20:54 (Ref:2792271)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

I think the only conspiracy is that Red Bull put Webber out there on the wrong strategy on purpose to mislead Ferrari, and it worked.

Two flies with one stone.

Well played, to be honest.

I'm with you on this one.
Vettel is their man. They must have known that Webber (and Alonso) would come out behind Rosberg and Petrov.
Vettel was way ahead, RBR used Webber as bait............hook, line and sinker!

wnut · 17 Nov 2010, 21:16 (Ref:2792291)

How about the FIA and FOCA look at the regulations and sort out the ability of the cars to race one another. As long as the aero troubles remain there will be excellent scope for bottling up the opposition behind a second car. If the cars could overtake one another there would be no possibility of this theory even arising.

...and way more interesting racing!

White flag man · 17 Nov 2010, 22:30 (Ref:2792337)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wnut

How about the FIA and FOCA look at the regulations and sort out the ability of the cars to race one another. As long as the aero troubles remain there will be excellent scope for bottling up the opposition behind a second car. If the cars could overtake one another there would be no possibility of this theory even arising.

...and way more interesting racing!

But then they'd have to get rid of Monaco!................

Sorry Jeremy, I couldn't stop myself.

Teretonga · 17 Nov 2010, 22:35 (Ref:2792344)

Quote:

Originally Posted by White flag man

But then we'd have to get rid of Monaco!................

Sorry Jeremy, I couldn't stop myself.

nah. They just have to widen the track from Casino Square to the swimming pool...... Small job

White flag man · 17 Nov 2010, 22:46 (Ref:2792351)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teretonga

nah. They just have to widen the track from Casino Square to the swimming pool...... Small job

A banked hairpin, there's an idea.

phoenix · 17 Nov 2010, 23:47 (Ref:2792370)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wnut

How about the FIA and FOCA look at the regulations and sort out the ability of the cars to race one another. As long as the aero troubles remain there will be excellent scope for bottling up the opposition behind a second car.

This didn't seem to worry the FIA or FOCA during Schumacher's Ferrari years, when his team mate (whoever it was from time to time) was used by the team to bottle up the rest of the field in the early part of each race to give Schumacher a 'free' pitstop in every race - so why would they care to do anything about it now?

Further more, if team orders are unofficially allowed, why should inter-team orders not be allowed? There is nothing in the rule book to outlaw them, is there?

TWRv12 · 18 Nov 2010, 00:31 (Ref:2792383)

Petrov has probably grown a pair a of wings with all the Redbull headed his way...

Chiefy · 18 Nov 2010, 19:28 (Ref:2792792)

Obviously there was no conspiracy, blah blah blah...

But, as a matter of interest, such a conspiracy would be tricky to coordinate for the "non-championship" (if you'll pardon that expression) teams.

The Renaults hold up the McLarens and Ferraris because they share [Renault] engines with Red Bull. The Toro Rossos defer to the Red Bulls because they are one and the same but the Toro Rossos do not defer to the Ferraris despite sharing engines.

And that essentially tells us why talk of conspiracy theories is overblown, because ultimately the championship would be Mercedes guys (Hamilton, Button, Schumacher, Rosberg, Sutil, Liuzzi) versus Ferrari guys (Alonso, Massa, Kobayashi, Heidfeld, Buemi, Alguersuari) versus Renault guys (Kubica, Petrov, Vettel, Webber and maybe Kovalainen and Trulli). And you might end up with a Red Bull/Renault super-faction that stole Buemi and Algo from the Ferrari side.

Someone stop me before I get carried away...

E.B · 21 Nov 2010, 13:04 (Ref:2793817)

Just to shut the theory down that Webber was stopped early as a bait for Alonso to ruin his race, or in any way to favour the RBR 'chosen one', some seem to have forgotten the events leading up to Webbers earlier than expected stop....

Not only was Webber being potentially held up by Alonso when he stopped (although quoting the live timing commentary they suggested on lap 10, prior to his stop,that it "was hard to tell now whether Webber is being held up by Alonso or if he's simply struggling for pace - it would seem to be more of the latter now"

The principal reason it would seem, and one given at the time by Red Bull is that they were concerned over Webbers right hand rear tyre, with Webber having the lap before clouted the wall hard enough for a shower of sparks to come from the contact.... indeed Red Bull were concerned that perhaps the tyre had been dislodged slightly on the rim, as was the case at Singapore following the contact with Hamilton. Clearly had the tyre deflated on track, the resulting delay would have clearly put Webber out of the WDC challenge, hence the decision to pit was more related to maintaining Webber's own challenge with minimal delay, given he needed to pit within a few laps for his tyre change anyway.