BBC Home

Explore the BBC

45 comments

user rating: 3 star

Piquets Win against Renault

Formula One
by Canis (U14507567) 07 December 2010
comment on the article

Apparently, according to John Noble, Piquet SR and JR have won what are described as "substantial damages" against Renault for libellous comments made around "crashgate".

Surely this lends more credence to the Piquets version of events? Will this be the end of the whole thing or are Renault going to be silly enough to drag it out further?

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Dec 8, 2010

@xiaf - Di Piquet Jnr ever admit the crash was his idea? I thought it was still a case of he said/he said?

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by xiaf (U14669740)

posted Dec 8, 2010

Yes Piquet Jr admitted it was his idea, its what guaranteed his immunity with the FIA.

Symonds admitted that Piquet made the suggestion, but denied that the team acted on it.

So basically the only guy who said he had the idea, and possibly acted on it was untouchable.

The oddest part is why did the FIA not act in late 2008, but did take action when Briatore had upset their applecart?

To a law court it would look very much like revenge/vested interests, but to the FIA kangaroo court its an open and shut case.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 8, 2010

Yeah OK Mingojo, I give in, Alonso is a dimwit who didn't query the strategy in the first place and didn't smell a rat after the event either until offered immunity in the subsequent investigation.

My goodness, you have a lower opinion of him than I do and that's hard!

Xiaf - you are factually incorrect. Piquet's position was that Symonds & Briatore put it to him. Of course, it suits Briatore & Symonds to say otherwise but this victory in the libel case helps confirm Piquet's story.

And indeed, let's not forget, the FIA investigation, incomplete as it was relative to Alonso & his team, applied penalties to both Briatore & Symonds.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by mingojo (U9897868)

posted Dec 9, 2010

Distantgreen, you tend to forget that Piquet jr, Symmonds, Briatore and Mosley have said that Alonso was not involved. But you continue attacking him even though you know you're speculating. Now you're saying that the investigation was not complete, basically because doesn't fulfill your wishes, dreams... If you think Fernando is guilty why don't you press charges againts him?

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by xiaf (U14669740)

posted Dec 9, 2010

Distantgreen

You have merely proved my point that the truth of anything depends upon whom you wish to believe.

A court might find in favour, but it is proof of nothing.
So basically Piquet says one thing and Briatore and Symonds another, no surprise there, but of these 3 only 1 was granted impunity. Where am i factually incorrect, Piquet has said he made the suggestion to help keep his drive.

My question is still why did the FIA ignore Piquet Sr in late 2008 but when the governing body had a problem with Briatore they suddenly took action? to any impartial individual this would be a question that required an answer.

Bear in mind also the Piquet, Herbie Blash, Charlie Whiting and Ecclestone connection, if they were going to pay attention to any drivers complaint it would be Piquet.

Whether you like any of the above i personally wouldnt trust any of them but Piquet Jr was complicit in this from the start so why is his word taken as gospel above all others?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 9, 2010

@xiaf

Do you have a link/proof that says that Piquet jnr suggested it? I thought he just admitted to agreeing to crash to keep his drive? I thought he was still denying suggesting it.

At the end off the day though what is done is done, whoever suggested it. The responsibility ultimately lies on those at that top Symonds/Briatore who shouldn't have allowed it to happen no matter who suggested it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 9, 2010

OK so the smokescreens are going back up.

Yes, Piquet said something different to Briatore & Symonds, surprise, surprise.

The FIA investigation and the recent libel case have some down on Piquet's side.

But to get back to the nub of it;

Did Alonso know beforehand?

If not, is it not most odd that he did not query a very extreme and unusual fuel strategy?

Even if was too dim to spot it beforehand, surely he's have found it most suspicious once the crash and his victory had played out. Others drivers queried it at the time I seem to remember. Alonso said nothing until the truth came out and there was an enquiry.

Dim or involved, has to be one or the other.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by mingojo (U9897868)

posted Dec 9, 2010

Distant,
at the time Alonso said that his team went for a risky strategy and Symmonds had done things simmilar in the past. What I can't understand from your reasoning is Piquet Jr has said that Alonso was not involved and you continue accusing him. Again, why don't you press charges if you are so sure that Fernando was involved?

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by xiaf (U14669740)

posted Dec 9, 2010

Distant.

Read my first post. The odd strategy was employed by McLaren for Hamilton from a similar grod spot in Aus 2009, suspicious about that one too?.

As i said to fix a race you would have to effectively choreagraph the entire field, think about how likely it is for all the cards to fall in your favour-the odds would be huge to bet on Massas stop for instance.

The smokescreens have been up but only since young Nelson got fired, again it depends on who you like and what you wish to be true.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 44.44%
    4 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 55.56%
    5 votes

average rating:
2.78 from 9 votes