It was Alonso's refusal to leave the pit box that made this whole thing erupt. Nando was pouting that a teammate wouldn't let him by. If he had just left the box when the lollipop went up, then both men get their laps and there's no harm done.
Ron Dennis: "The truth will come out"
- Thread starter Brogan
- Start date
So not letting someone past in qualifying is worse than using stolen IP and blackmail?
Okay then.
Surely the important thing in this is the ensuing train of events? As far as I am aware there was a team agreement which one driver reneged on and the other driver then took exception to when it was not implemented.
They were both at fault and acting like kiddies.
It then escalated into something completely different and, possibly, only Ron knows the truth - we certainly don't and I sincerely hope I live long enough to read Ron's version, along with anyone else who feels they might have been involved enough to actually have a credible viewpoint.
The reason Hamilton did not let Alonso past was because Raikkonen was breathing down his neck. I have no idea why they wanted to be first, but they apparently did.
Notwithstanding that, it is the height of unprofessionalism to then block your own team-mate in his pit box.
People have ignored team orders in the past without it causing an expulsion from the Constructors' Championship and a $50,000,000 fine. In fact, they have been acclaimed from all corners for doing so.
Something that some seem to have missed is that Hamilton was not the only driver to ignore team orders. That lollipop going up is a team order, namely "Get on the track!"
Spygate was a stitch up of the most nauseating variety. When McLaren were sentenced they immediately reported Renault for the same crime - this was never investigated. Everyone did it, and everyone probably still does it!
In addition, if Person A (an employee at Teabagyokel & Decker) discusses our top secret lawnmower blades with Person B (the chief lawnmower designer at FBlymo) and FBlymo then produce a lawnmower with the same blades, at what point have FBlymo done anything that can be construed as spying?
I'm not sure I agree that Hamilton should have obeyed the team orders in Hungary to start with, but I think blaming all this on him is the kind of thing you can only do if you have decided your conclusion before looking at the facts.
Notwithstanding that, it is the height of unprofessionalism to then block your own team-mate in his pit box.
People have ignored team orders in the past without it causing an expulsion from the Constructors' Championship and a $50,000,000 fine. In fact, they have been acclaimed from all corners for doing so.
Something that some seem to have missed is that Hamilton was not the only driver to ignore team orders. That lollipop going up is a team order, namely "Get on the track!"
Spygate was a stitch up of the most nauseating variety. When McLaren were sentenced they immediately reported Renault for the same crime - this was never investigated. Everyone did it, and everyone probably still does it!
In addition, if Person A (an employee at Teabagyokel & Decker) discusses our top secret lawnmower blades with Person B (the chief lawnmower designer at FBlymo) and FBlymo then produce a lawnmower with the same blades, at what point have FBlymo done anything that can be construed as spying?
I'm not sure I agree that Hamilton should have obeyed the team orders in Hungary to start with, but I think blaming all this on him is the kind of thing you can only do if you have decided your conclusion before looking at the facts.
How do you know that? And if so, to what effect? And if that were the case, why was Alonso not asked to attend (or, indeed, subpoenaed) the hearing - surely if he was such an integral part of the 'plot' his presence would have been required?
Where has all this information come from?
Soundbites reported by the media - to whatever end. The press can and do support each and everyone's stance, as long as you pick your bits carefully!
It's all available on the FIA website (or at least it was) if you want to read the documented case.
No soundbites, no tabloids, no spin, etc; just the facts.
Nothing I have said in the last few posts has been personal bias or false, and it was all confirmed.
I suspect that may mean unpleasant reading for Alonso fans, but I'm not the one who was using stolen Ferrari data or who tried to blackmail anyone.
No soundbites, no tabloids, no spin, etc; just the facts.
Nothing I have said in the last few posts has been personal bias or false, and it was all confirmed.
I suspect that may mean unpleasant reading for Alonso fans, but I'm not the one who was using stolen Ferrari data or who tried to blackmail anyone.
In the same way, it is a tad ingenuous to lay it all at Alonso's door.
And I'm still not convinced that we know the facts, so it is all done to personal preference again.
I don't actually lay Spygate at Alonso's door; as I've said above I believe it was a stitch-up.
As for the qualifying session, I come to the same conclusion as the stewards - a punishment for McLaren for breaking the team orders ban (although it was unnecessarily excessive) and a punishment for Alonso for blocking.
However, if McLaren wanted to run Q3 in that session one-and-two, if this was a stated aim, then Hamilton did right because by allowing Alonso through he would also have let Raikkonen through.
Let’s be honest, espionage is something that goes on up and down the paddock. Did FIA take action against Spiker when a whistleblower handed them information in the form of a technical drawing from a Toro Rosso part that was manufactured by Redbull? The whole Spygate investigation was a farce and as you say a massive stitch up. Consider the double standards that followed in dealing with similar infringements and it was hard to take anything under Max's tutelage seriously. The real concern, which every avid F1 fan should worry about, was that the fact that the real perpetrators were allowed to get away scot free. Max very rarely passes up the chance to drag anyone to court ( I realise he's a millionaire but surely all these court dates must be draining his coffers) so I think Ron is just biding his time. As someone has already mentioned in this thread, it would probably be his personal take on events as the hard facts are pretty much out in the open and people are free to formulate an opinion as they see it.
Just what stolen data was he using? Did he put the Ferrari braking system on his car? Did he decide what gas he would have in his tyres? Did he determine when his pit stops would be?
As far as I remember these were what the "stolen" data amounted to. Incidentally, it was not stolen, it was given away.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the start of Q3 Alonso was second in line, ahead of Raikkonen. So letting Alonso through would not have also let Raikkonen through. Since it was qualifying and not the race, it was a legal instruction given out by the team to get their drivers' tactics correct for the way they were fuelled. Alonso had adhered strictly to the team instructions throughout the season, Hamilton was the one who disobeyed his employer. The reason these instructions were given was so that both drivers got their fair share of the advantageous strategy. Unfortunately Hamilton decide that he didn't like fair. Alonso should not have reacted as he did but that does not excuse what Hamilton did in the first place.
Imo the only person to come out of the whole affair was Ron Dennis. Even though he knew that the team would be given a horrendous penalty he reported what he had discovered to the FIA, allowing MM to demand a penalty which was not reasonable when compared with what happened to others.
Yeah that's why Ferrari took Nigel Stepney to court, because they allowed him to give away their intellectual property.
I don't think Ron or anyone for that matter envisaged that scale of penalty, especially considering the FIA failed to produce the smoking gun they were looking for. It was clear from the outset that the sharing of confidential data was not widespread within McLaren and FIA themselves acknowledged this. It came down to arguing the minutiae and Max continually prejudiced the hearing with his subtle digs about McLaren not being honest and continually repeating the accusation that the Ferrari document arrived at McLaren when this was not the case (It landed with Coughlan). He was probably irked by the fact that Ron kept referring to him during the hearing as ‘Max' rather than 'Mr President'. The focus subsequently shifted from the possession of the Ferrari dossier to the sharing of illicitly obtained data between two drivers and what turned out to be a rogue Ferrari employee. I suspect McLaren would easily won an appeal at the Court of Arbitration based on the transcripts of the hearing alone and the behaviour of certain FIA personnel, had they not been threatened with expulsion and effectively bullied into accepting that disproportionate fine. Ron for all his faults takes absolute pride in how far he’s brought McLaren as a company and a racing team and subsequently caved in to FIA’s demands for purely selfless reasons.
I've already refered to the fact I don't know the in's and out's of this and can I believe that Max Mosely was carrying out a personel vendetta against Mclaren? Of course I can.
But the whole reason I jumped into this one was the fact its used to show how awful Fernando Alonso is - I think coward and showing his character were the phrase used - meanwhile Mr Dennis comes out of this as the selfless martyr. I'm not really sure I get it.
The facts are that Mclaren recieved and reviewed information that was passed on to them illegally. How many people reviewed it and what use it was and who know what, when and how I have no idea to but that remains a fact so therefore Mclaren as a team were guilty of this. Now whether the punishment fitted the crime is a complete different story but however bias the decision was against them when it comes down to it they were guilty so Ron's "the truth will be revealed one day" and acting like the martyr who threw himself on the sword for his beloved team at the end of the day is a load of BS because whatever information Ron has that he hasn't revealed won't change that. He could have a signed letter from Max dated 2002 saying "I'm going to try and find a way to fine your team and get you out of F1" and it wouldn't change the fact that at the end of the day Mclaren were guilty of being in possesion of 'stolen' information.
Now are they the first team to do this? no of course they're not. F1 has a massive history of industrial sabatoge that has been discovered and not discovered. In fact I bet there isn't a team who have ever been in F1 who haven't been associated with some form of scandal - its the nature of the beast. Should Mclaren have been punished for it? of course if it was discovered. Does this scar the Mclaren team forever and ever? Of course not. They did the crime, held their hands up for it(eventually), took their punishment and thats the end of that.
Which brings me to Mr Alonso. Did he cover himself in glory? No he didn't. He was involved in an argument with the team he was with(something that I don't think was all his fault) and acted in a stupid way. But can you tell me which one of us here in a fit of anger hasn't done something stupid? As for him being the way to look at the data - I hardly think he woould have sought out the data himself I'm pretty sure it would have been passed to him and I'd be shocked to my core if you were to tell me himself, Pedro De La Rosa and Mike Coulghan were the only people that were aware the data was being looked at. But if that is the case we're still talking only being in possesion of stolen goods not actually done the crime himself.
So out of all this my question is why is it that some people view Mclaren as some sort of martyrs and Alonso as some sort of slimey rat? Why are one set of people forgiven for a wrong doing and another one not? You either move on from the whole thing and forgive both or hold the grudge against both parties right? You can;t just forgive one and not the other because you happen not to like him. Either Alonso is a rat coward and Mclaren are cheats or you say both got involved in things they shouldn't and have learnt their lesson and moved on.
What the even bigger question is for me is why is Fernando singled out? Nearly every world champion I can think of has at some point been involved in a situation where they have not been truthful or have gone behind someones back or have bent the rules to try and win. Every single one. Now what was Fernando's crime for him to be the most disliked? well unfourtunatly he commited his 'crimes' when in competition with a British driver.
The 3 most hated men in F1 in my time watching the sport? Fernando Alonso, Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna. Can I deny that these 3 pushed the rules to the limteds on occasions? no. Can I deny that any of the 3 would step over their own Granny to win a Grand Prix? no. Were their crimes any worse than their competitions at the time? No - they just did it more succesfully. Senna had Mansell, Schumie had Hill/Coulthard and Alonso has Hamilton and none of these Brits could be the superheros they became unless they had a super villian to fight against so thats what they became.
Senna had to die on track before people recognised that although his style was aggressive he was one of the true greats and an amazing human being to boot. I hope Fernando doesn't have to do the same.
anyways - the real criminals in all this that get away scot free without anyone writing articles about them on the internet? Nigel Stepney and Mike Coulghan!
But the whole reason I jumped into this one was the fact its used to show how awful Fernando Alonso is - I think coward and showing his character were the phrase used - meanwhile Mr Dennis comes out of this as the selfless martyr. I'm not really sure I get it.
The facts are that Mclaren recieved and reviewed information that was passed on to them illegally. How many people reviewed it and what use it was and who know what, when and how I have no idea to but that remains a fact so therefore Mclaren as a team were guilty of this. Now whether the punishment fitted the crime is a complete different story but however bias the decision was against them when it comes down to it they were guilty so Ron's "the truth will be revealed one day" and acting like the martyr who threw himself on the sword for his beloved team at the end of the day is a load of BS because whatever information Ron has that he hasn't revealed won't change that. He could have a signed letter from Max dated 2002 saying "I'm going to try and find a way to fine your team and get you out of F1" and it wouldn't change the fact that at the end of the day Mclaren were guilty of being in possesion of 'stolen' information.
Now are they the first team to do this? no of course they're not. F1 has a massive history of industrial sabatoge that has been discovered and not discovered. In fact I bet there isn't a team who have ever been in F1 who haven't been associated with some form of scandal - its the nature of the beast. Should Mclaren have been punished for it? of course if it was discovered. Does this scar the Mclaren team forever and ever? Of course not. They did the crime, held their hands up for it(eventually), took their punishment and thats the end of that.
Which brings me to Mr Alonso. Did he cover himself in glory? No he didn't. He was involved in an argument with the team he was with(something that I don't think was all his fault) and acted in a stupid way. But can you tell me which one of us here in a fit of anger hasn't done something stupid? As for him being the way to look at the data - I hardly think he woould have sought out the data himself I'm pretty sure it would have been passed to him and I'd be shocked to my core if you were to tell me himself, Pedro De La Rosa and Mike Coulghan were the only people that were aware the data was being looked at. But if that is the case we're still talking only being in possesion of stolen goods not actually done the crime himself.
So out of all this my question is why is it that some people view Mclaren as some sort of martyrs and Alonso as some sort of slimey rat? Why are one set of people forgiven for a wrong doing and another one not? You either move on from the whole thing and forgive both or hold the grudge against both parties right? You can;t just forgive one and not the other because you happen not to like him. Either Alonso is a rat coward and Mclaren are cheats or you say both got involved in things they shouldn't and have learnt their lesson and moved on.
What the even bigger question is for me is why is Fernando singled out? Nearly every world champion I can think of has at some point been involved in a situation where they have not been truthful or have gone behind someones back or have bent the rules to try and win. Every single one. Now what was Fernando's crime for him to be the most disliked? well unfourtunatly he commited his 'crimes' when in competition with a British driver.
The 3 most hated men in F1 in my time watching the sport? Fernando Alonso, Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna. Can I deny that these 3 pushed the rules to the limteds on occasions? no. Can I deny that any of the 3 would step over their own Granny to win a Grand Prix? no. Were their crimes any worse than their competitions at the time? No - they just did it more succesfully. Senna had Mansell, Schumie had Hill/Coulthard and Alonso has Hamilton and none of these Brits could be the superheros they became unless they had a super villian to fight against so thats what they became.
Senna had to die on track before people recognised that although his style was aggressive he was one of the true greats and an amazing human being to boot. I hope Fernando doesn't have to do the same.
anyways - the real criminals in all this that get away scot free without anyone writing articles about them on the internet? Nigel Stepney and Mike Coulghan!
Probably a bit of both Bro.
I would say its not uncommon in law to offer immunity for evidence even from people that are guilty themselves in order to catch the 'bigger fish' as it were.
I guess the FIA(and certainly Max from what I'm hearing) saw Mclaren as the bigger fish.
I'm also sure they'll claim it had something to do with not disrupting the World Drivers Championship as well.
I would say its not uncommon in law to offer immunity for evidence even from people that are guilty themselves in order to catch the 'bigger fish' as it were.
I guess the FIA(and certainly Max from what I'm hearing) saw Mclaren as the bigger fish.
I'm also sure they'll claim it had something to do with not disrupting the World Drivers Championship as well.
McLaren did not receive this information. This is a very important distinction when evaluating the whole saga. The Ferrari dossier was found at Coughlan’s house following a police raid and at no point did it make its way into McLaren. Again FIA acknowledged that the situation originated with the actions of a single rogue McLaren employee acting on his own and without McLaren’s knowledge or consent. Coughlan received technical information from Stepney which he communicated to Alonso and De la Rosa. The latter two were conveniently given immunity yet in establishing guilt; FIA used them as the link to McLaren the team despite clear evidence that neither Hamilton nor the hierarchy within McLaren were privy to such information.
the 'lone gunmen' it is then. hmmmm.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article