Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Why was René Arnoux fired by Ferrari?

Started by potmotr , Feb 25 2008 23:41

This topic is locked

36 replies to this topic

#1 potmotr

Member

12,995 posts
Joined: January 08

Posted 25 February 2008 - 23:41

Can anyone solve the age old mystery of the real reason behind Rene Arnoux's sacking by Ferrari at the start of the 1985 season?

#2 Twin Window

Nostalgia Host

6,611 posts
Joined: May 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 00:04

All I would ask, dear fellow TNFers, is please be careful what you say...

Seriously.

#3 David M. Kane

Member

5,402 posts
Joined: December 00

Posted 26 February 2008 - 00:36

Twin Window:

If someone knows the real answer, why not just send him PM? I don't need to know.

#4 ghinzani

Member

2,027 posts
Joined: October 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 01:39

Much conjecture has been written before on here, why not use the search facility to look at those old threads?

#5 macoran

Member

3,989 posts
Joined: August 05

Posted 26 February 2008 - 01:52

Whadevah ee dun Enzo noh like eet !

#6 MonzaDriver

Member

424 posts
Joined: September 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:03

Very interesting topic.
All I remember and knowing is the way the Italian mass-media, looked at this particular moment in Ferrari's history. Almost like if it never happened, without any interest.

Also the specialized magazines, they almost give up about the journalistic scoop.

Potmotr asking about the real reason, that a very difficult question,
because based on the Italians magazines about motor racing I dont know about a Single reason.
Maybe the others TNF could start with a range of possibilities...........

Ciao a tutti.
MonzaDriver.

#7 ensign14

Member

61,951 posts
Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:11

Originally posted by David M. Kane
Twin Window:

If someone knows the real answer, why not just send him PM? I don't need to know.

It's still defamatory...even with limited publication.

#8 MonzaDriver

Member

424 posts
Joined: September 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:44

Our moderator,
the always very well balanced and in the meantime keen Twin Window advise us,
in a precise and surely consciuos manner.......
Ensign 14 that surely know about the law, say that it's still defamatory..........

Let me use a banal expression........WOW.

MonzaDriver.

#9 Vitesse2

Administrator

41,859 posts
Joined: April 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:46

Originally posted by ensign14

It's still defamatory...even with limited publication.

Only if it's not true ;)

#10 1george

Member

1,517 posts
Joined: June 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:49

Anybody who is interested, send me a PM.

#11 MonzaDriver

Member

424 posts
Joined: September 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 09:51

Originally posted by Vitesse2

Only if it's not true ;)

So it could be true !

MonzaDriver

#12 GIGLEUX

Member

1,519 posts
Joined: April 03

Posted 26 February 2008 - 10:05

http://forums.autosp...oux and ferrari

#13 Vitesse2

Administrator

41,859 posts
Joined: April 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 10:06

Originally posted by MonzaDriver

So it could be true !

MonzaDriver

That depends on which story you've heard. I know of at least two ....

#14 ensign14

Member

61,951 posts
Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 10:21

Originally posted by Vitesse2

Only if it's not true ;)

No, it's still defamatory.

Just not actionable.

(Successfully.)

#15 David McKinney

Member

14,156 posts
Joined: November 00

Posted 26 February 2008 - 10:27

Furthermore, truth is not a defence in all jurisdictions

#16 MonzaDriver

Member

424 posts
Joined: September 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 10:34

Originally posted by Vitesse2

That depends on which story you've heard. I know of at least two ....

Like you said, I' ve Heard not Read about one..........

MonzaDriver

#17 potmotr

Member

12,995 posts
Joined: January 08

Posted 26 February 2008 - 11:34

Well I certainly didn't intend on getting anyone sued when I posed the question, but it seems to be one of the great untold mysteries of motor sport, and whatever way you look at it, a cracking yarn.
No one seems to know the answer or be prepared to divulge it.
So many journalists who work or have worked within the sport clearly have a very good idea of the allegations. Why would someone not try to nail this one down? Were the Italian journalists of the day too fearful of upsetting the Old Man? What has Rene Arnoux ever said about it?
It would be the best feature in Motorsport ever. Maybe I'll write a letter to Nigel Roebuck now he's running that show...

#18 ensign14

Member

61,951 posts
Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 11:57

"Nail" is not necessarily an inapt word... :lol:

#19 potmotr

Member

12,995 posts
Joined: January 08

Posted 26 February 2008 - 12:17

If a similar thing happened today the lines of truth would be smeared so quickly between so many websites that there would have to be some form of disclosure pretty quickly to prevent corporate brands freaking out I'd imagine.

#20 MonzaDriver

Member

424 posts
Joined: September 04

Posted 26 February 2008 - 13:42

Paddock's life is difficult.

MonzaDriver

#21 fines

Member

9,647 posts
Joined: September 00

Posted 26 February 2008 - 18:01

Originally posted by ensign14

It's still defamatory...even with limited publication.

How can the truth be defamatory? That's an oxymoron, methinks...

The one thing I would respect is the possibility of a crime not (yet!) detected by law to stay undetected, as it would appear that those involved would have no interest in prosecution. But, this having happened more than twenty years ago, every crime bar murder would now come under the statute of limitations, so c'mon now, surely René didn't kill somebody!!!???

If somebody knows, forget the crap and post away! :rolleyes:

#22 David McKinney

Member

14,156 posts
Joined: November 00

Posted 26 February 2008 - 18:27

Originally posted by fines
How can the truth be defamatory? That's an oxymoron, methinks...

If I discover some heinous secret about you, which no-one knows, it defames you if I make it public (but not until). Whether or not it's true - and I'm sure it's not :lol:

#23 ensign14

Member

61,951 posts
Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 18:29

"Defamatory" just means a statement calculated to lower the person's reputation. "Defamation" is the relationship between defamatory statements and the law. Not all defamatory statements are actionable - they include those made in Court, in Parliament, slanderous ones that do not cause damage (unless they impute imprisonable offences) and true ones. Although there is an odd exception - spent criminal convictions; mention those and you can be sued, even if they happened.

And silence can be defamatory. "Mr X was sent to prison for murder." Defamatory. True. Left unsaid: "...and Mr X won his appeal on the basis that Mr Y confessed to it." So that's defamatory.

Incidentally there is no statute of limitations in England for criminal offences, you could be tried for something that happened in 1947 if you hadn't been before. The point of this however is M Arnoux could take action against autosport/atlas for allowing defamatory statements - and the burden of proof would be on autosport/atlas. And if anyone can prove either of the rumours about Arnoux' departure, they'll be lucky...

#24 Hieronymus

Member

2,032 posts
Joined: May 02

Posted 26 February 2008 - 18:36

This thread reminds me of a popular opinion out here:

TRUE HAPPINESS - The day the last lawyer is strangled with the guts of the last politician.

#25 ensign14

Member

61,951 posts
Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2008 - 20:38

If people didn't try to cheat, there wouldn't be a need for lawyers.

#26 COUGAR508

Member

1,184 posts
Joined: February 07

Posted 26 February 2008 - 21:00

Originally posted by Vitesse2

That depends on which story you've heard. I know of at least two ....

I know of two explanations put forward, and it may be that a combination of the two factors contributed to Rene's departure.

#27 Arjan de Roos

Member

2,583 posts
Joined: July 02

Posted 26 February 2008 - 21:35

Originally posted by ensign14
.... you could be tried for something that happened in 1947 if you hadn't been before.

In 1947 the first Ferrari was produced. Or is this OT?

#28 Todd

Member

18,936 posts
Joined: September 99

Posted 26 February 2008 - 22:10

Originally posted by ensign14
If people didn't try to cheat, there wouldn't be a need for lawyers.

You'd think at least some of them could pull it off without the help of a professional.

#29 LB

Member

13,575 posts
Joined: February 01

Posted 27 February 2008 - 02:04

Originally posted by GIGLEUX
http://forums.autosp...oux and ferrari

One thing that could be knocked straight on the head is the granddaughter thing, as Dino died in 1956 he is unlikely to have produced a grandchild in 1969/70. Piero may have I guess but I can't find any details. did Enzo have any daughters?

#30 Paul Taylor

Member

1,312 posts
Joined: March 02

Posted 27 February 2008 - 03:44

He was dropped because Stefan Johansson was better...? :confused:

;)

#31 Jack-the-Lad

Member

2,466 posts
Joined: March 03

Posted 27 February 2008 - 03:49

Originally posted by Paul Taylor
He was dropped because Stefan Johansson was better...?

;)

That would be the least likely reason.....;)

Jack

#32 Catalina Park

Member

6,774 posts
Joined: July 01

Posted 27 February 2008 - 07:16

He walked out of the team due to an argument over Le Mans driver pairings. Oh hang on... :cool:

#33 Arjan de Roos

Member

2,583 posts
Joined: July 02

Posted 27 February 2008 - 08:05

Originally posted by LB

One thing that could be knocked straight on the head is the granddaughter thing, as Dino died in 1956 he is unlikely to have produced a grandchild in 1969/70. Piero may have I guess but I can't find any details. did Enzo have any daughters?

In fact Piero Ferrari is grandfather through his daughter Antonella. The little lad is called ... Enzo.

One should bear in mind what Rene would have done would he have stayed on at Ferrari, considering Michele's runner up position in the championship. Maybe Rene would have been able to compensate the poor performance of the scuderia in the second half of 1985. Given that a certain mr Prost his oponent.

#34 eldougo

Member

9,352 posts
Joined: March 02

Posted 27 February 2008 - 08:32

As Twinny said choose your words carefully on this subject....... Rene was the meat in the ferrari sandwich that turned sour and he did not help the result along . :up:

#35 Hieronymus

Member

2,032 posts
Joined: May 02

Posted 27 February 2008 - 09:25

Originally posted by eldougo
As Twinny said choose your words carefully on this subject....... Rene was the meat in the ferrari sandwich that turned sour and he did not help the result along .

Pure literary brilliance!!