GPWizard F1 Forum

F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Chris Borg on September 15, 2009, 06:53:44 AM

Title: Musings
Post by: Chris Borg on September 15, 2009, 06:53:44 AM

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_feature_item.php?fes_art_id=39015 (http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_feature_item.php?fes_art_id=39015)

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: John S on September 15, 2009, 08:43:29 AM

I enjoyed reading that Chris, not sure I agree with his summation of the Renault situation, but a good post. :good:

I am having difficulty about the supposed Pat Symonds comment that the Piquet child raised the issue of the shunt. Pat has been stone walling the investigators according to most reports, on Renault and probably legal instructions, so just when did the comment get made? I think this may be harder for the WMSC solve than it appears to some commentators. After all it's one thing to have a feeling something has been done wrong but proving it can be a different matter.

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: Chris Borg on September 15, 2009, 12:53:00 PM

Quote from: John S on September 15, 2009, 08:43:29 AM

I enjoyed reading that Chris, not sure I agree with his summation of the Renault situation, but a good post. :good:

I am having difficulty about the supposed Pat Symonds comment that the Piquet child raised the issue of the shunt. Pat has been stone walling the investigators according to most reports, on Renault and probably legal instructions, so just when did the comment get made? I think this may be harder for the WMSC solve than it appears to some commentators. After all it's one thing to have a feeling something has been done wrong but proving it can be a different matter.

Symonds offered immunity.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=39017 (http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=39017)

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: John S on September 15, 2009, 01:34:49 PM

Pat cannot accept immunity without sinking Flav, they have been together too long for him to even contemplate a deal. IMO

Anyway he would be finished if he accepts an immunity deal as it an admission that he was involved in the crash and therefore race fixing, what team could give him a job with that on his record.

All this leaking and anonymous breifing of the press stinks to high heaven. >:D

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: Chris Borg on September 15, 2009, 02:02:04 PM

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78647 (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78647)

Transcript of Pat Symonds' FIA interview. 

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: Jericoke on September 15, 2009, 02:14:06 PM

Quote from: John S on September 15, 2009, 01:34:49 PM

Pat cannot accept immunity without sinking Flav, they have been together too long for him to even contemplate a deal. IMO

Anyway he would be finished if he accepts an immunity deal as it an admission that he was involved in the crash and therefore race fixing, what team could give him a job with that on his record.

All this leaking and anonymous breifing of the press stinks to high heaven. >:D

If they're going to give immunity to everyone involved, who's going to be left to be punished? 

(Okay, fine, I know Max wants his parting shot to be sinking Flavio.  I can PRETEND to be naive about this, right?)

I guess there is a case to be made against Flavio though:  he was in charge, the buck stops with him, even if he had nothing to do with it.  Further, he was Piquet Jr.'s manager, and supposed to be looking out for his client's best interests.  Surely most people would agree that crashing a car is seldom a great idea.

But really, Piquet crashed the car.  Even if he was following orders, that's proven not to hold up in court.

Title: Re: Musings
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on September 15, 2009, 08:56:55 PM

This is the FIA kangeroo court here, not a real tribunal with standards of evidence. They can simply decide Renault was guilty and that's that.

Lonny