Renault Dismiss Flav and Pat or Oh dear… Here comes trouble - Page 12

**Born Racer** · 12 Sep 2009, 19:20 (Ref:2539182)

I can't speak for others, but I'm not calling for a life ban. However, two wrongs don't make a right, and Senna ought to have been severely punished for Suzuka 1990. At least Senna made it obvious what he was doing. And there wasn't any mendacity was there? Whereas Renault seem to be denying this, despite also bizarrely acknowledging that the notion of Piquet crashing was discussed.

strider · 12 Sep 2009, 20:27 (Ref:2539237)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jab

Anyway, apparently this guy he lived with is his old mechanic, Agnaldo Furlani

I remember the guy. He couldn't speak a word of English so we never chatted, but he always said whatever the Portuguese for 'hello' is and was very friendly and normal.

As Nelsinho says in that interview, he was was like a second father to him, but much more straightforward and less devious. There was absolutely nothing strange about their relationship.

No wonder Rubens is annoyed on Nelson's behalf. I've always thought Briatore was a nasty piece of work and confirms it. To me it also suggests that he's seriously worried and clutching at straws.

djinvicta · 12 Sep 2009, 20:39 (Ref:2539242)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sodemo

But that was 20 years ago. Now we are safety-obsessed.

Lets be honest. Senna was the B......S, not in Piquets league and we all knew at the time what he was going to do before the start. Some people even looked forward to the clash, and were waiting for the illegal move.

**Bononi** · 12 Sep 2009, 21:08 (Ref:2539261)

Yeah, it was highly anticipated and detailed in TV one day before the race...

djinvicta · 12 Sep 2009, 21:12 (Ref:2539263)

It was fantastic though!!

**Born Racer** · 12 Sep 2009, 21:16 (Ref:2539265)

In one sense, Senna's move on Prost was worse then Piquet's thing because he could have killed another driver; it was a dramatic collision.

Super Hans · 12 Sep 2009, 21:30 (Ref:2539276)

Deliberately colliding with a competitor at high speed with the aim of taking him out of the race - Bad.

Deliberately crashing on your own as part of some crazy scam - Bad, not quite as bad as the above.

jab · 12 Sep 2009, 21:40 (Ref:2539280)

Had Senna done that in the year 2009, he would've been kicked out, no question. But it was in the year 1990, and he's been dead 14 years, so it's largely irrelevant really

**Bononi** · 12 Sep 2009, 21:45 (Ref:2539283)

One thought. Piquet Jrn crashed to fix a race, allegedly asked by his team bosses.

Rubens slowed and let his mate win to fix a race, openly ordered by his team bosses.

What's worse ?

Piquet Jrn, Briatore and Symmonds

or

Rubens, Todt and Brawn ?

Basically the same thing.

duke_toaster · 12 Sep 2009, 21:48 (Ref:2539284)

The rules about team orders affecting the race has changed (E.G. the clause has been added), and the current incident is clearly damaging to the sport. Tu quoque isn't the best way of resolving these things.

JeremySmith · 12 Sep 2009, 21:53 (Ref:2539288)

Well Bon ethically both actions are as bad as each other, the difference being that slowing down to let your team mate pass is not going to get anyone hurt, and crashing might have..

But it's all a giant bloody yawn to be honest..

Super Hans · 12 Sep 2009, 21:58 (Ref:2539289)

Quote:

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Tu quoque

Hush hush, eye to eye.

**Bononi** · 12 Sep 2009, 22:37 (Ref:2539298)

Tu quoque ?

Marbot · 12 Sep 2009, 23:54 (Ref:2539323)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

Tu quoque ?

Latin for 'You too' or 'You also'.To accuse someone of the same charge.

Marbot · 12 Sep 2009, 23:57 (Ref:2539328)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

Basically the same thing.

Now let's imagine that Raikkonen had spun at turn 17 just shortly after Massa had pitted.

**Bononi** · 13 Sep 2009, 01:31 (Ref:2539346)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

Latin for 'You too' or 'You also'.To accuse someone of the same charge.

I know that, I was asking the same way

Although it might be referring to the term as a "logical fallacy"...

**Bononi** · 13 Sep 2009, 01:33 (Ref:2539347)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

Now let's imagine that Raikkonen had spun at turn 17 just shortly after Massa had pitted.

Ok, I'm imagining...

Marbot · 13 Sep 2009, 08:04 (Ref:2539427)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

Ok, I'm imagining...

OK.Let's just swap the gaudy coloured Renault cars for the red cars and run the same scenario.

Basically the same thing?

strider · 13 Sep 2009, 09:25 (Ref:2539461)

Here's an interesting and strong point of view expressed by Patrick Head.

The angle that Formula 1's integrity is at stake here is one that I'm hearing more often now and makes it less likely, I think, that this case is going to be swept under the carpet.

nameless · 13 Sep 2009, 09:35 (Ref:2539464)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

One thought. Piquet Jrn crashed to fix a race, allegedly asked by his team bosses.

Rubens slowed and let his mate win to fix a race, openly ordered by his team bosses.

What's worse ?

Piquet Jrn, Briatore and Symmonds

or

Rubens, Todt and Brawn ?

Basically the same thing.

Not strictly true, the only person schumacher was able to pass as a result of rubens and the team actions was rubens himself, whereas with the piquet incident (if true) alonso was able to leapfrog/stay ahead of numerous drivers from other teams. Thereby cheating others out of points not just members of your own team - a massive difference in my opinion.

Marbot · 13 Sep 2009, 11:12 (Ref:2539525)

Quote:

Originally Posted by strider

The angle that Formula 1's integrity is at stake here is one that I'm hearing more often now and makes it less likely, I think, that this case is going to be swept under the carpet.

If it goes to a hearing then it's not being "swept under the carpet".

The worst thing that could have happened is that nothing happened.

Nice to hear someone saying that a team needs to be dealt with firmly,rather than the more 'perhaps just a slap on the wrist because it's all something over nothing' attitude that we sometimes get.

We forget that the 'proper' punishment for McLaren should probably have been exclusion or disqualification.The $100m fine let them off lightly compared to the almost certain death of the team had a more strict punishment been given.A $100m fine doesn't come anywhere near exclusion or disqualification in terms of loss of revenue.

**Bononi** · 13 Sep 2009, 11:44 (Ref:2539552)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nameless

Not strictly true, the only person schumacher was able to pass as a result of rubens and the team actions was rubens himself, whereas with the piquet incident (if true) alonso was able to leapfrog/stay ahead of numerous drivers from other teams. Thereby cheating others out of points not just members of your own team - a massive difference in my opinion.

The idea is to let his teammate win, right ? Not strictly, but basically the same thing as fixing a race. THAT's where everything starts wrong, once you can't agree on a principle, you can argue every aspect of the issue.

In my opinion, Rubens said that one who crashes to fix a race don't deserve to be in the sport. I agree, pretty much what I thought about him after Austria 2002.

**Bononi** · 13 Sep 2009, 11:53 (Ref:2539556)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

OK.Let's just swap the gaudy coloured Renault cars for the red cars and run the same scenario.

Basically the same thing?

Red cars ? Do you want me to imagine the Marlboro red or the new Santander red ?

Speaking of imagining, let's go back to the root of this idea.

That should be easy to imagine if you have a six pack of beers...

I don't drink alcoholic drinks.

But I can fantasize pretty well about those girls standing in front of me...

Baaack on topic, hurry !!!!

**Bononi** · 13 Sep 2009, 12:21 (Ref:2539578)

Quote:

Originally Posted by strider

Here's an interesting and strong point of view expressed by Patrick Head.

The angle that Formula 1's integrity is at stake here is one that I'm hearing more often now and makes it less likely, I think, that this case is going to be swept under the carpet.

Yeah, I think that good old mate Livio has hit the sport there...
One can't be sure, but Briatore might get out of this unscathed

If I was Junior, I would do a "Pedro Diniz", go back home, get hold of one of Dad's millionaire business and spend with lots of "wannabe models" that are available everywhere in that country... you never can get enough of that. And forget about F1 for good.

chillibowl · 13 Sep 2009, 12:26 (Ref:2539579)

to me "race fixing" implies the results have been fixed in order to win a wager or money. and since this is F1 and every position is worth prize money this should be a case of major fraud (BE comments at OZ this year)

If the FIA has proof (even proof enough that this episode deserves further scrutiny) how has evidence not been turned over to the authorities who should be involved by now? at the very least a proper police investigation would keep Flav from shooting his mouth off.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Dear Dear Dear FPR (merged x1)	DJJ	Australasian Touring Cars.	238	3 May 2010 02:34
ING in trouble, what happens with Renault?	nobster	Formula One	46	30 Nov 2008 13:19
Proton - dismiss at your peril?	touringlegend	Touring Car Racing	18	28 Feb 2004 02:17
Oh dear, oh dear, prepare for the farce	angst	Formula One	3	25 Aug 2000 11:01
Jaguar: Oh dear oh dear oh dear	Minardi fan	Formula One	5	16 May 2000 07:21