Javascript Disabled Detected

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

The FIA report on McLaren

Started by metz , Dec 13 2007 20:01

Please log in to reply

114 replies to this topic

#1 metz

Member

15,871 posts
Joined: July 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 20:01

Here is the report.

http://www.fia.com/public/mclaren.pdf

Since we know the 3 or 4 areas of concearn, it is quite easy to substitude the (redacted-confidential) words.

I found section 42 to be of particular interest.

Could this have been Hamilton?
Since PDLA and FA's statements DID NOT contradict earlier statements.

After reading this, it's clear to me that BMW, Renault, Williams and all the other teams deseved the bump up the finishing lader.

#2 Zdeus

Member

309 posts
Joined: May 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 20:34

Till this point I was not convinced about the FIA, but sadly this last piece of information shows that the FIA was not wrong. I can only agree with the FIA's decisions. In-fact it disgusts me how all along McLaren tried to play innocent and acted as being victimized.

#3 mach4

Member

1,873 posts
Joined: December 99

Posted 13 December 2007 - 20:49

Originally posted by metz

I found section 42 to be of particular interest.

Could this have been Hamilton?
Since PDLA and FA's statements DID NOT contradict earlier statements.

Good point. It does seem that Hamilton would fit in best there. The only other possibility would be the other McLaren test diver, Paffett, which I think is unlikely.

#4 Ross Stonefeld

Member

70,106 posts
Joined: August 99

Posted 13 December 2007 - 20:56

After about the third entry the [deleted] bit becomes annoying, but funny. It's like those writing games when I was little where you fill in nouns, verbs, and adjectives and create your own stories.

#5 SchumiBoy

Member

1,261 posts
Joined: July 02

Posted 13 December 2007 - 20:58

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
After about the third entry the [deleted] bit becomes annoying, but funny. It's like those writing games when I was little where you fill in nouns, verbs, and adjectives and create your own stories.

The could've atleast color coded the main characters so you could follow the plot properly ;)

#6 Ross Stonefeld

Member

70,106 posts
Joined: August 99

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:01

Im sure someone in Hollywood will now start writing scripts in this style to make sure they don't leak early.

#7 metz

Member

15,871 posts
Joined: July 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:03

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
After about the third entry the [deleted] bit becomes annoying, but funny. It's like those writing games when I was little where you fill in nouns, verbs, and adjectives and create your own stories.

Well, we know the 3 technical bits under discussion.
I found it easy to substitude
A-Manual Brake Ballance (Quick Shift)
B-Brake Cylinder regulator (Fast Fill) and
C-Tyre inflation ( CO-2 )
As to individuals, there were so many more (up to 20) that it's hard to guess, but possible.

#8 Showty

Member

2,183 posts
Joined: November 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:26

I´m quite shocked here.

This report is just that, shocking.

With all that have been said i never expected McLaren to go that FAR.

I think Ron Dennis has to feel thankful with the outcome of all this, the penalisation has been reaaaally unfair.

#9 pRy

Member

26,311 posts
Joined: March 99

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:30

I think we're lucky to be given access to all this data, however much it's redacted. It's a shame the FIA didn't make the same mistake twice. But still.. with all the items they've released, theres plenty of content for a book or several large articles.

#10 512 TR

Member

2,228 posts
Joined: April 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:33

People like me were ridiculed here for months...now you know who was right and who's opinion carried weight.

#11 kma4444

New Member

20 posts
Joined: July 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:40

I think (redacted-confidential) are a bunch of (redacted-distasteful) lumps of (redacted-inexcusable). If I ever again (redacted-incomprehensible) like that pile of (redacted-unsupportable) then someone please tie me to a tree and (redacted-unmentionable)....

#12 SCHUEYFAN

Member

500 posts
Joined: February 02

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:44

wRONg Dennis is a lying *******, does any sane person here really believe he didn't know about it? How senior was this personnel, I wish they'd publish it. I'll say it again, they should have been thrown out of 2007 entirely but fortunately the right man and team won the titles.

#13 Clare

Member

158 posts
Joined: December 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:46

Originally posted by Ravindra Nagpurkar
....
In-fact it disgusts me how all along McLaren tried to play innocent and acted as being victimized.

Me too.

Btw, why did Whitmarsh signed the letter and not Ron, where is he? Did he attend the hearing last friday? Or is it not important enough to him and his reputation?
Maybe he is retired?

#14 AyePirate

Member

5,823 posts
Joined: April 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:48

Originally posted by 512 TR
People like me were ridiculed here for months...now you know who was right and who's opinion carried weight.

a broken clock is right twice a day

#15 Dolk

Member

891 posts
Joined: January 03

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:49

"Yeah, I just completely forgot to be honest, I completely forgot."

Hello there Mr 2/20.

#16 kyriakos75

Member

438 posts
Joined: August 04

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:52

Originally posted by Clare

Me too.

Btw, why did Whitmarsh signed the letter and not Ron, where is he? Did he attend the hearing last friday? Or is it not important enough to him and his reputation?
Maybe he is retired?

Maybe he wasn't told about the letter. After all, if we are to believe him, he doesn't seem to be aware of many things going on in his team

#17 512 TR

Member

2,228 posts
Joined: April 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 21:58

Originally posted by AyePirate

a broken clock is right twice a day

Nice poetry! Are you Jim Morrison by any chance? :wave:

#18 AyePirate

Member

5,823 posts
Joined: April 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:04

Originally posted by 512 TR

Nice poetry! Are you Jim Morrison by any chance?

No it's an old old saying that predates Mister. Mojo Rising by quite some time :wave:

#19 robnyc

Member

5,350 posts
Joined: November 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:10

Originally posted by Clare

Me too.

Btw, why did Whitmarsh signed the letter and not Ron, where is he? Did he attend the hearing last friday? Or is it not important enough to him and his reputation?
Maybe he is retired?

he should be.. He does not deserve to step on a Circuit ever again.. Integrity.. :rotfl:

tears.

#20 robnyc

Member

5,350 posts
Joined: November 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:16

Originally posted by Dolk
"Yeah, I just completely forgot to be honest, I completely forgot."

Hello there Mr 2/20.

how about this one..

"I cannot remember how I came to know about this confidential information about the internal workings of the Ferrari brake mechanism. It came from the "grapevine knowledge""

#21 512 TR

Member

2,228 posts
Joined: April 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:19

Originally posted by AyePirate

No it's an old old saying that predates Mister. Mojo Rising by quite some time

Really? To me is sounded like something from one of his unused books of lyrics.

#22 robnyc

Member

5,350 posts
Joined: November 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:21

Ferrari's statement..

“Ferrari notes the apology offered today by the McLaren Group, following the investigations carried out by the FIA Technical Department, as presented to the WSMC on December 7.

“The written and verbal statements issued by senior McLaren personnel both at the World Council meetings of the July 26 and September 13 and through the media have thus been publicly proved wrong. Therefore it is admitted that confidential information which was the property of Ferrari was disseminated within the structure of the English team and this also confirms the seriousness of the behavior of those involved over the past few months.

“In the light of McLaren’s apology and the guarantees it has presented, Ferrari respects the proposal of the FIA president to cancel the extraordinary general meeting of the WSMC scheduled for February 14, thus bringing this incident to a close from a sporting point of view. However, it is confirmed that criminal actions underway in Italy and civil ones in England are still continuing.”

SpeedTV

#23 ZZMS

Member

1,645 posts
Joined: July 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:24

very careful choice of words here.. "respects FIA's proposal" is far from "agrees with FIA's proposal"...

#24 Showty

Member

2,183 posts
Joined: November 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:25

Originally posted by robnyc

how about this one..

"I cannot remember how I came to know about this confidential information about the internal workings of the Ferrari brake mechanism. It came from the "grapevine knowledge""

It´s just amazing.

And some people still wondering why De La Rosa is in McLaren.

Man, DLR has been the perfect scapegoat for McLaren during this time, God only knows what was happening behind the curtains, the fact is the McLaren organization found the perfect wall to be hidden behind of with all the history about Alonso and DLR e-mails.

Ron Dennis and Withmarsh have to be really thankful with DLR, i can´t imagine the penalty McLaren could have had received if all that is surfacing now would have been known a few months ago.

#25 Scudetto

Member

8,226 posts
Joined: May 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:26

Originally posted by ZZMS
very careful choice of words here.. "respects FIA's proposal" is far from "agrees with FIA's proposal"...

The net effect of which is the same, and, regardless, is more constructive than a statement reading, "To hell with your apology and screw your proposals, we want a hearing and McLaren banned from running in 2008."

#26 robnyc

Member

5,350 posts
Joined: November 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:27

Originally posted by ZZMS
very careful choice of words here.. "respects FIA's proposal" is far from "agrees with FIA's proposal"...

is not over is what I read..

#27 robnyc

Member

5,350 posts
Joined: November 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:30

Originally posted by Showty

It´s just amazing.

And some people still wondering why De La Rosa is in McLaren.

Man, DLR has been the perfect scapegoat for McLaren during this time, God only knows what was happening behind the curtains, the fact is the McLaren organization found the perfect wall to be hidden behind of with all the history about Alonso and DLR e-mails.

Ron Dennis and Withmarsh have to be really thankful with DLR, i can´t imagine the penalty McLaren could have had received if all that is surfacing now would have been known a few months ago.

they also wont let him go because he is the most technical driver in the team and has the most knowledge about the Ferrari IP in his collective memory.. the cheaters were planning to continue cheating in 2008. Really this is beyond stupidity....

#28 Cinquecento

Member

2,163 posts
Joined: June 99

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:33

What did Robert DeNiro's character say in Casino? "I'm sorry, but he knew about our gettin' hit on three big machines in a row and he did nothing about it. That means either he was in on it or, forgive me for saying this, he was too dumb to see what was going on."

Those are about the only choices left on what to think of Mr Ron "Here's my wife" Dennis as the head of McLaren. Either way, can't have a man like that looking after their integrity.

I am severely appalled.

#29 Zdeus

Member

309 posts
Joined: May 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:39

Oh ! yes - and can we please have Mr.Martin Brundle's experienced and passionate comments on this please, please.

#30 JForce

Member

13,847 posts
Joined: March 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:50

Originally posted by metz
I found section 42 to be of particular interest.

Could this have been Hamilton?
Since PDLA and FA's statements DID NOT contradict earlier statements.

An excellent observation.

"In interview, [Senior McLaren Engineer] claimed he could not remember [McLaren Driver] telling him the information that [Senior McLaren Engineer] referred to in the email above. [McLaren Driver], however, confirmed that he had indeed told [Senior McLaren Engineer] the information in question. [McLaren Driver] also confirmed that the information had come to Stepney via Coughlan.
[McLaren Driver] recognised that this communication to a McLaren engineer of confidential Ferrari information was contrary to his earlier statement to the WMSC. He said:

"Yeah, I just completely forgot to be honest, I completely forgot"

*bold emphasis mine

So it seems that Lewis and Ron are made for each other

#31 S�bastien

Member

1,267 posts
Joined: October 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:51

Originally posted by robnyc
Ferrari notes the apology offered today by the McLaren Group, following the investigations carried out by the FIA Technical Department, as presented to the WSMC on December 7.

“The written and verbal statements issued by senior McLaren personnel both at the World Council meetings of the July 26 and September 13 and through the media have thus been publicly proved wrong. Therefore it is admitted that confidential information which was the property of Ferrari was disseminated within the structure of the English team and this also confirms the seriousness of the behavior of those involved over the past few months.

“In the light of McLaren’s apology and the guarantees it has presented, Ferrari respects the proposal of the FIA president to cancel the extraordinary general meeting of the WSMC scheduled for February 14, thus bringing this incident to a close from a sporting point of view.”

Very good of Ferrari, there is no point in letting this go on and on any more for the sake of F1.
I am glad that they can let it go and be in other words "the bigger team" here. :up:

Originally posted by robnyc
"However, it is confirmed that criminal actions underway in Italy and civil ones in England are still continuing..”

Right we'll see what comes of Mr. Stepney but the future doesn't look very bright for him now.
Red Fury the book, in your dreams Stepney, off you go Nige into.... well wherever rats go.

#32 Massa_f1

Member

5,630 posts
Joined: October 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:53

Originally posted by Ravindra Nagpurkar
Oh ! yes - and can we please have Mr.Martin Brundle's experienced and passionate comments on this please, please.

Brundle looks like a right idiot now in my view any one who actualy thought Mclaren would not use Ferrari data when they had over 700 pages of it was wrong and have to much faith in the sport. It wasent hard to work out they would use it.

#33 sensible

Member

1,910 posts
Joined: February 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:57

Originally posted by JForce

An excellent observation.

*bold emphasis mine

So it seems that Lewis and Ron are made for each other

It could have been DLR. What he said at all times basically put the best looking spin on the stuff he'd been caught doing, so its quite probably that he was caught out at least once. I doubt Lewis would have been involved - he didnt have enough experience to be doing anything at that level

#34 cartman

Member

341 posts
Joined: February 05

Posted 13 December 2007 - 22:59

"Yeah, I just completely forgot to be honest, I completely forgot"

It happens. Everyone "forgets" how to be honest sometimes. :rotfl:

#35 DLaw

Member

1,614 posts
Joined: February 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:01

They are all dirty. Face it. Including St. Lewis.

#36 Anomnader

Member

8,616 posts
Joined: May 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:01

hmmm, seems to smack yet again of FIA, shifting the attention from themselves and the Renault case.

Yet again, they are pulling out all the guns to damm McLaren but brushing anything about the Renault case from view.
Very curious why renault are getting it so easy from the head executioner,as mentioned previously, we are here to defend the other team, happened for Ferrari, but when it was macca vs renault, it was FIA for renault yet again.

#37 Yellowmc

Member

2,057 posts
Joined: May 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:05

I think the difference is Renault are telling the truth, McLaren didn't. :clap:

#38 Anomnader

Member

8,616 posts
Joined: May 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:07

Originally posted by Yellowmc
I think the difference is Renault are telling the truth, McLaren didn't.

Who knows, they certainly seemed to have FIA on their side believing everyword, even down to saying we have come forward, when everyone knows that was not true.

#39 sensible

Member

1,910 posts
Joined: February 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:10

Originally posted by Yellowmc
I think the difference is Renault are telling the truth, McLaren didn't.

You get the benefit of the doubt the first time - as mac did. After that you should get the book thrown at you.

#40 pingu666

Member

9,272 posts
Joined: October 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:14

Originally posted by Massa_f1

Brundle looks like a right idiot now in my view any one who actualy thought Mclaren would not use Ferrari data when they had over 700 pages of it was wrong and have to much faith in the sport. It wasent hard to work out they would use it.

wasnt the information from the "other" stuff?

having read the report they arent giving macca the benifit of the doubt at all, unlike say renault :rolleyes:

i still find the evidence rather tenuous, such a shame macca never had ferrari drawings laying about the office for months ;)

whether the selective anemsia actully was that, or was general forgettory, goodluck proving either way.

#41 JForce

Member

13,847 posts
Joined: March 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:19

Originally posted by Anomnader
hmmm, seems to smack yet again of FIA, shifting the attention from themselves and the Renault case.

Yet again, they are pulling out all the guns to damm McLaren but brushing anything about the Renault case from view.
Very curious why renault are getting it so easy from the head executioner,as mentioned previously, we are here to defend the other team, happened for Ferrari, but when it was macca vs renault, it was FIA for renault yet again.

Read this weeks Grapevine article by Dieter. It will explain why you're wrong.

#42 Massa_f1

Member

5,630 posts
Joined: October 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:21

Originally posted by pingu666

wasnt the information from the "other" stuff?

having read the report they arent giving macca the benifit of the doubt at all, unlike say renault

i still find the evidence rather tenuous, such a shame macca never had ferrari drawings laying about the office for months ;)

whether the selective anemsia actully was that, or was general forgettory, goodluck proving either way.

They themselves basicaly have said they were going to use some of it in 2008, how much more proof do u want?

#43 Anomnader

Member

8,616 posts
Joined: May 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:24

Originally posted by JForce

Read this weeks Grapevine article by Dieter. It will explain why you're wrong.

not got a subscription so, no idea. Not saying he hasn't written a good article, but I could just as well give out a link to grandprix.com article which finds it all very fishy. We believe which biased article we want to, you yours, mine, mine.

#44 ingegnere

Member

724 posts
Joined: February 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:25

Originally posted by robnyc

is not over is what I read..

Max leaving it up to the WMSC to decide whether to proceed is so he can't be accused of witch-hunting. If the WMSC agrees that the hearing should be held, no one can blame Max and McLiaren have only themselves to blame.

And as I wrote elsewhere, that's some apology. While the FIA went to the trouble of not disclosing the technologies involved, McLiaren didn't go down without one last kick at the can, lowlifes that they are - they disclosed some details of system in question and gas composition for the benefit of the whole paddock!

Already at the hearings some info, which would otherwise have been left undisturbed, was discussed and further info leaked out by the FIA .pdf screw-up.

And as for McLiaren saying they didn't know that the Stepney info was more widely disseminated that originally admitted to, this is just disingenuous. You only need to read the proceedings of the second FIA hearing to understand that practically everyone at McLiaren had some info from the Ferrari mole.

#45 Anomnader

Member

8,616 posts
Joined: May 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:26

Originally posted by Massa_f1

They themselves basicaly have said they were going to use some of it in 2008, how much more proof do u want?

Can you point out that exact passage please.

#46 Anomnader

Member

8,616 posts
Joined: May 06

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:27

Originally posted by ingegnere

McLiaren didn't go down without one last kick at the can, lowlifes that they are - they disclosed some details of system in question and gas composition for the benefit of the whole paddock!.

Oh please

#47 David M. Kane

Member

5,402 posts
Joined: December 00

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:42

Why did the letter have "private and confidential" on it? :confused:

#48 Scudetto

Member

8,226 posts
Joined: May 01

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:44

Originally posted by David M. Kane
Why did the letter have "private and confidential" on it?

Probably because at the time it was written - over a week ago - it was.

#49 pingu666

Member

9,272 posts
Joined: October 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:49

Originally posted by Massa_f1

They themselves basicaly have said they were going to use some of it in 2008, how much more proof do u want?

more than whats given in the report ;)

#50 ingegnere

Member

724 posts
Joined: February 07

Posted 13 December 2007 - 23:49

Originally posted by Anomnader

...but I could just as well give out a link to grandprix.com article which finds it all very fishy.

Oh, please! Grandprix.com?

Back to Racing Comments Archive

Quick Navigation

The FIA report on McLaren

#1 metz

#2 Zdeus

#3 mach4

#4 Ross Stonefeld

#5 SchumiBoy

#6 Ross Stonefeld

#7 metz

#8 Showty

#9 pRy

#10 512 TR

#11 kma4444

#12 SCHUEYFAN

#13 Clare

#14 AyePirate

#15 Dolk

#16 kyriakos75

#17 512 TR

#18 AyePirate

#19 robnyc

#20 robnyc

#21 512 TR

#22 robnyc

#23 ZZMS

#24 Showty

#25 Scudetto

#26 robnyc

#27 robnyc

#28 Cinquecento

#29 Zdeus

#30 JForce

#31 S�bastien

#32 Massa_f1

#33 sensible

#34 cartman

#35 DLaw

#36 Anomnader

#37 Yellowmc

#38 Anomnader

#39 sensible

#40 pingu666

#41 JForce

#42 Massa_f1

#43 Anomnader

#44 ingegnere

#45 Anomnader

#46 Anomnader

#47 David M. Kane

#48 Scudetto

#49 pingu666

#50 ingegnere

Sign In