please log in to view this image With the gradual and sometimes surreptitious return to F1 of personae non grata, I wonder what you think the likelihood or value of the return of previously banned personalities may be, and who you think should get a second chance. There are other instances than just the individuals the FIA banned (such as those who were quietly retired or moved to other business areas), but I'll just list those who are recently considered newsworthy. Mike Coughlan: received a two-year ban for his part in the 'spygate' controversy, which "expired some time ago." He worked with Stefan GP on its failed attempt to get into F1 in 2010 and will start work with Williams in June as chief engineer. Williams will assess Coughlan's suitability to take over as technical director from Sam Michael. Patrick Head is also expected to retire this season. Nigel Stepney: received a twenty month prison sentence and €600 fine on 29 September 2010 for his part in 'spygate' but is unlikely to actually serve any time in prison under the Italian legal system. Having been sacked by Ferrari no formal action was taken against him by the FIA. He worked as team manager for the Sumo Power Nismo team in the FIA GT1 2010 World Championship. Pat Symonds: received a five-year ban on 21 September 2009 for his part in the 'crashgate' controversy, which was overturned by the French Tribunal de Grande Instance on 5 January 2010. On 12 April 2010 Symonds and the FIA reached a settlement under which he agreed not to work in F1 until the 2013 season. This has been further clarified to explain that he can undertake work in F1 in a consultancy capacity. Symonds is currently working for Virgin Racing reviewing the development process of its 2011 car. Flavio Briatore: received a lifetime ban on 21 September 2009 for his part in the 'crashgate' controversy, which was overturned by the French Tribunal de Grande Instance on 5 January 2010. On 12 April 2010 Symonds and the FIA reached a settlement under which he agreed not to work in F1 until the 2013 season. There are dark rumours circulating that Briatore might return to F1 in a role in the Ferrari team. He continues to manage F1 drivers. Nelson Piquet Jr: as a whistleblower Piquet was given immunity by the FIA for his part in the 'crashgate' controversy. Martin Brundle wrote, "Piquet Jr is is unemployable in F1 now." Bernie Ecclestone dropped hints that Piquet Jr was being considered as Bruno Senna's team mate in the Campos team for 2010, but claims he had signed a three-year contract later proved to be a hoax. Piquet described Briatore's abilities as a team manager, saying he "is ignorant about Formula 1... if you listen to the pit-wall radio, it's like a joke. He hasn't got a clue what is happening in the race... he makes comments that don't make any sense... it's like listening to something my sister would say about the car." Piquet Jr currently drives in the NASCAR Camping It Up World Truck Series. Like Raikklolnen.
The only one I see with legitimate grounds to return is Piquet Jnr, the rest shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the sport. As for him being unemployable, surely the whistleblowing shouldn't bother any team with nothing to hide? Although he wasn't the quickest, so maybe thats why nobody wants him.
He just fit the pattern of Renault number two drivers. This could still be happening. Petrov seems to have improved a lot since Kubica was injured.
Oh, go on. I know there's a very small difference of opinion between us on what I would describe as the degree of Pat Symonds's culpability for Crashgate but we've had that discussion. I'm quite surprised at your response, DHCanary. Not that it isn't a perfectly valid opinion, I just haven't heard it expressed before. Personally, I think any driver who would even contemplate deliberately crashing his own car shouldn't be racing in any category. I agree that being a grass shouldn't prevent him being employed but Renault are hardly the only team in F1 who have ever had something to hide. He's also, however, not the only driver who has revealed incriminating information about his team to the FIA. I have to say, I don't consider receiving a competitor's technical information from an employee of that team to be such a huge transgression of the ethics of Formula 1. It was wrong, true, but in the same timeframe Renault were in possession of McLaren information and Nigel Stepney claimed that Ferrari had also received McLaren information from Coughlan. IMO it's part of the game and, whether by inspiration, observation or skulduggery, teams copy other teams' developments all the time. I know we're talking about entertainment businesses here - limited companies or PLCs or whatever - and that they do have HR departments, communications and legal personnel, business and marketing strategists, etc., and that people consider Spygate to be an case of industrial espionage. Fundamentally, though, aren't we really talking about racing teams - sports teams? Should we really be applying real-world business regulations to an environment that already operates according to a set of sporting regulations? What do people think about Stepney? Because of his plea bargain we'll never know the truth about the mysterious white powder found in his trouser pockets and Kimi Raikkonen's fuel tank. By his own admission he was unhappy at Ferrari, having been overlooked for promotion following Ross Brawn's departure. He denied involvement in the Spygate saga and claimed he'd been framed, which was clearly untrue. He might not have deliberately crashed his car, nor coerced one of his drivers to do so, but I'd like to know the truth about that white powder thing.
They should all be able to come back into F1 since the whole grid is full of cheats. You all know Flavio will get that Ferrari job, it's so obvious!
With Piquet, and I know I have no experience on which to base this, I imagine he was in an incredibly difficult position. I don't imagine that they said "Oh, Nelson, you don't mind crashing next corner do you?" and he did it, I imagine (hope) it was more akin to the situation that Barrichello found himself in with Schumacher, or Massa with Alonso. Barrichello has said in an interview (I think with Top Gear) that it was like they were holding a gun to your favourite dog. He didn't want to let Schumacher past, but felt blackmailed and had little choice, so I assume Piquet to be in the same category. Add to the equation the fact that he's a young driver, not established in the sport, driving below his best and worried for his seat next year, I imagine a few choice words were enough. The actual crash couldn't have been planned by Renault more than a couple of laps previously, due to the unique circumstances, so he didn't have long to think about it. The important point was that he did, when he had time to think about things a bit, do what was right and go to the FIA, so I feel its hard to penalise him too harshly, especially when compared to the rest of the rogues gallery in the poll!
I think it's been established that it was agreed (by Symonds and Piquet Jr in Briatore's office with Briatore present) "shortly before the race". They didn't give him the chance to sleep on it, though, that's for sure. I'm not saying Piquet Jr's version should be trusted without question but I don't think the timing of the agreement has been contested and, IIRC, Witness X's statement was said to have corroborated the main points of Piquet's version of events. It was months before he went to the FIA - shortly after Renault had dropped him, coincidentally.
Hmm, wasn't aware of that, I thought the two events were closer together, sour grapes anyone? He clearly couldn't have been much of a negotiator, if he'd turned the screw on them I bet he could have kept his seat so Briatore and co didn't get forced out of the sport. I'm not sure what I think of Piquet now! Although having just read through the declaration you linked to, I'm now swaying back to supporting him a bit. That statement would have to have been given on oath, and maybe he delayed it to the end of the season in case it meant he kept his seat? Admittedly thats still putting himself above the fairness of the sport though. I don't know. Still he's in a grey area to me.
Piquet Jnr had control of the car and intentionally made it crash. As a young driver with poor performances, he might have felt pressured into cheating by two disgraceful men, but the fact that he only came to senses and exposed Crashgate after he got sacked suggests that revealing the cheating was just a way to get revenge on Flavio. By the way, that picture is just nasty! I have an exam tomorow and I can't concentrate because that image of Flavio is stuck in my head! EDIT: sorry I think this has already been mentioned
I think that Piquet Jnr. has no reason not to return to F1, other than that he is ****! Thankfully, I've just had my only exam this week, so can get that image out of my head before Philosophy next thursday
Jose I'm guessing you're doing A2's and Jersey is taking AS's? Good luck to both of you. I've got first year uni exams starting next week, so I'm busy revising too. This is now my 10th consecutive exam period, so I'm getting the hang of it now! (Thats January and Summer each year). With regards crash-gate, an interesting aside is whether Alonso was aware of the plan or not? He was short fuelled compared to everyone else, which to an experienced driver like him would not have seemed like the optimum strategy to start the race with, so did he suspect something was orchestrated when Piquet crashed, or did he know?
I don't think Alonso would have been perfectly clean, but I don't think he would have been told until after the race. If he was, I doubt he would have said anything against it.
It wasn't that bad. I only struggled with the question about footballers (why would they even ask us things like that?) Thanks. I'm redoing AS as last year I didn't work hard enough and bunked maybe a bit too many lessons, and ended up failing (well technically I passed, but it wasn't the grades I wanted). So I left the 6th forum and restarted my A-levels at a college. Good luck with your exams. I don't think Alonso had knowledge about it. His celebrations after wining looked genuine and he also acknowledged the effect of safety car on his race - if he knew about it before, he would have kept his mouth shut. Alonso worked with Flavio for a number of years and the two have a close relationship. I think Alonso would've trusted Renault on his unusual strategy. I don't know why Flavio decided to use such tactics, but I don't think Alonso is evil enough to have known what was going to happen, and then take all the credit for the victory after the race.
Work hard and get to a decent uni Jose, trust me its worth it. Just watched Alonso's celebrations after the race and compared it to another race win of his, theres nothing from the Singapore race to make me suspicious, so maybe he didn't know, I wonder if he said anything internally when it all came out?
