Jump to content


Photo

Hamilton apologies to Whiting


  • Please log in to reply
196 replies to this topic

#1 BrawnsBrain

BrawnsBrain
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:45

Well, the truth is out.

This article by Adam Cooper is essential reading http://www.autosport...cle.php/id/2100

So having refused to change his story right up until Ryan was fired, Hamilton then requested a private meeting with Charlie Whiting in Malaysia to apologise for lying.

Of course, plenty of questions have been asked of Hamilton & Ryan, plenty of muck thrown at these two, tragically costing one of them his career.

But what the article draws attention to is how extraordinary it is that Ryan has been made the only scapegoat, and how Whitmarsh in partcular did not know what was going on the day after, and indeed right up until the next weekend.

In fact, I think the whole McLaren pit wall was inplicit in knowing that Hamilton and Ryan had lied. Even Ron Dennis had heard the radio communication requesting Hamilton to move over - so when Trulli was given a penalty later in the day why didn't they ask themselves the simple question: how did Trulli get penalised?

I find it ridiculous that Ryan just took it upon himself after leaving that pit-wall, to hatch the plan with Hamilton to mislead the stewards. It must surely have been discussed on the pit wall beforehand.

Ryan is not the only guilty party, and the only reason, it seems, that Hamilton still has a job is that he's the world champion not a behind the scenes manager. Hamilton is just as guilty as everyone else.

There will be further scalps at McLaren come the end of April.

Advertisement

#2 primer

primer
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:49

Originally posted by BrawnsBrain
and how Whitmarsh in partcular did not know what was going on the day after, and indeed right up until the next weekend.


Didn't Whitmarsh lie (to media) in Australia itself? How could he be ignorant?

#3 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:51

and you have to pay to read this.. great. :

#4 BrawnsBrain

BrawnsBrain
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:52

The assumption was that Whitmarsh was not implicit in the lie, and didn't know what had been done in the stewards meeting.

But it simply doesn't stack up - knowing what was said on the radio to let Trulli past, and knowing that Trulli had got a penalty, why was Whitmarsh saying as late as 5 days later that McLaren had 'not lied'?

Of course he knew they'd lied. He tried to cover it up with denials.

#5 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:55

wasn't he away?

#6 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 16:56

I don't see how Whiting's story tells us anything about who knew what in McLaren.

#7 Philzippy

Philzippy
  • Member

  • 187 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 17:05

Whitmarsh didn't lie - he omitted certain information - the interviewer didn't ask and therefore there was no reason to divulge more information than necessary.

Whitmarsh wasn't in the Steward's meeting and was genuinely ignorant to the "lie" - he was too busy flying off to his holiday. I think this shows terrible leadership. He should have been 100% aware of everything said and done at all times.

:down:

#8 Gilles12

Gilles12
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 17:06

The whole of the pitwall heard the instruction

And Norbert even told the press they had let Trulli past!

#9 DLaw

DLaw
  • Member

  • 1,613 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 April 2009 - 17:22

Man, it just doesn't look good for Mac.


They were warned from spygate to better behave. And continue to lie and shit, they could be kicked out.

#10 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,309 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 10 April 2009 - 17:42

Yet the main allegation from Mr Whiting - who has been on the record as telling untruths before - is this:

When asked very clearly did you consciously let him past, did you pull over to let him past, he said 'No.'

That's two questions. But one answer.

#11 Eastern

Eastern
  • Member

  • 1,409 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 17:55

The question I am asking myself is this: what the is Charlie Whiting doing spouting off to the press about what Hamilton did or did not say in stewards' meetings, when the entire matter is subject of a quasi-judicial hearing (also known in the vernacular as a kangaroo court)? Personally I think Hamilton is probably guilty as charged - but yet again we watch a so-called FiA prosecution being conducted without any regard to due process.

Plus ca change, plus c'est la même chose......

#12 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 6,326 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 10 April 2009 - 18:41

I was saying this right from the start: I would find it incredibly hard to believe that Whitmarsh was not aware of the fact Hamilton was told to let Trulli pass. Entire Mclaren pitwall had nothing else to do at the moment than figuring it out with Charlie. But hearing what he said directly after the race to BBC ('Trulli shouldn't have passed Hamilton') and his later remarks which were 'technically true' but it was clear it had BS written all over them for everyone who was paying attention... nope, I don't buy it. He knew exactly what was going on.

#13 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 10 April 2009 - 18:52

I feel sorry for Lewis; he's has dreadful run of bad luck and coincidences, both on track and off it, in his brief career which would very easily convince the layman that Lewis is a cynical, ruthless, lying, dishonest, disrespectful, jumped-up, spoilt, media-savvy super shite. Damn lucky we all know better :up:

#14 VicR

VicR
  • Member

  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 18:53

What is McLaren, who is McLaren? That's the question.

Looks like the truth has finally caught up with Team McLaren. They've been given so many chances over the years to clean up their act. But I guess some people are beyond regret and remorse.

...and the judge's gavel fell.

#15 jesee

jesee
  • Member

  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 19:09

Posted Image Da dada da dada......


Posted Image


This story is honestly geting too much recycled and milked to the last drop and it is honestly becoming a bore. Hamilton lied...fact, so how many times do we have to be told this? Until cows come home?

#16 sldsmkd

sldsmkd
  • Member

  • 176 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 19:51

I agree with the dead horse beater above. Less soap opera, more racing please.

#17 JPW

JPW
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 19:57

Originally posted by ensign14
Yet the main allegation from Mr Whiting - who has been on the record as telling untruths before - is this:

Oh well if all those who told untruths before should be silent then McLaren might as well abolish pitradio ;)

Anyway I for one understand very well that Charlie Whiting wants to get his 2c in, he has been on the receiving end of McLaren lying, cheating and frivolous protests for some years now.
I am sure he would like the WMSC to make an end to that once and for all.

He clearly appreciated Lewis' apology, I wonder whether anyone else from McLaren had the guts or decency to apologize to him too?

Some free advice for jesee:
Don't like a tread stay out and don't post silly pictures :rolleyes:

#18 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 20:53

Originally posted by BrawnsBrain
I find it ridiculous that Ryan just took it upon himself after leaving that pit-wall, to hatch the plan with Hamilton to mislead the stewards. It must surely have been discussed on the pit wall beforehand.


yet

Originally posted by Gilles12
Norbert even told the press they had let Trulli past!


Which is why a conspiracy seems unlightly....to me anyway....

If there was a conspiracy surly Norbert Haug would also play along????

#19 MichaelPM

MichaelPM
  • Member

  • 2,587 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 20:55

Originally posted by Mika Mika


yet



Which is why a conspiracy seems unlightly....

If there was a conspiracy surly Norbert Haug would also play along????

He was too busy celebrating with Brawn to get the McLaren memo :rotfl:

Advertisement

#20 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 21:08

or Norbert might not be part of the 'whitmarsh gang'....

in which case fire the lot and put him in charge :)....

#21 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 10 April 2009 - 21:18

One for Ensign

How would it look if one of the main witness for the prosecution was deciding to give media reports before the court case?

#22 le chat noir

le chat noir
  • Member

  • 4,278 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 10 April 2009 - 21:35

"I was distinctly uncomfortable about Lewis's demeanour on Sunday [in Australia], and on Thursday [in Malaysia] I would say he was just doing what he was told to do," said Whiting. "On Sunday it was completely clear that he was telling lies.

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/74394

If it was so clear on Sunday, Charlie, why did you penalise Trulli? Why did you wait four days to say you thought he was lying?

#23 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 21:51

Originally posted by le chat noir
"I was distinctly uncomfortable about Lewis's demeanour on Sunday [in Australia], and on Thursday [in Malaysia] I would say he was just doing what he was told to do," said Whiting. "On Sunday it was completely clear that he was telling lies.

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/74394

If it was so clear on Sunday, Charlie, why did you penalise Trulli? Why did you wait four days to say you thought he was lying?


They had to check he was lying first.

#24 VicR

VicR
  • Member

  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 21:57

Originally posted by le chat noir
"I was distinctly uncomfortable about Lewis's demeanour on Sunday [in Australia], and on Thursday [in Malaysia] I would say he was just doing what he was told to do," said Whiting. "On Sunday it was completely clear that he was telling lies.

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/74394

If it was so clear on Sunday, Charlie, why did you penalise Trulli? Why did you wait four days to say you thought he was lying?


Because back then he could only assume what he thought was the truth. Without hard evidence everyone is innocent before proven guilty. It's better to stay silent at a point like that because sometimes people are innocent. Not in this case though but Charlie didn't know it back for sure. It sounds like he knew and he probably felt that. It's sad what happened to Jarno before his name was cleared. But the most important thing should be to get to the truth in the end. We're getting there, slowly.

#25 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,924 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:09

Originally posted by VicR


Because back then he could only assume what he thought was the truth. Without hard evidence everyone is innocent before proven guilty. It's better to stay silent at a point like that because sometimes people are innocent. Not in this case though but Charlie didn't know it back for sure. It sounds like he knew and he probably felt that. It's sad what happened to Jarno before his name was cleared. But the most important thing should be to get to the truth in the end. We're getting there, slowly.


So instead of checking telemetry, video and audio they penalized Trulli, just like that. Hard evidence was 5 min. away.

This has bullsh** written all over it, Charlie "the Tool" again telling fairytales. Woods has his PR/opinion machine in 7th gear.

#26 VicR

VicR
  • Member

  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:13

Originally posted by peroa


So instead of checking telemetry, video and audio they penalized Trulli, just like that. Hard evidence was 5 min. away.

This has bullsh** written all over it, Charlie again telling fairytales. Woods has his PR/opinion machine in 7th gear.


Maybe he is and maybe he isn't. Charlie is just a pawn in this game. But truth has this uncanny ability to surface through a sea of lies anyway. Truth usually (not always of course) comes out, especially if stupidity and arrogance have been factors.

#27 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:15

I don't think that data can be provided in 5 minutes. Those guys are understaffed and they were probably busy with kubica's incident. Its a sunday and everyone wants to go home.

#28 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,924 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:16

Originally posted by BMW_F1
I don't think that data can be provided in 5 minutes. Those guys are understaffed and the were probably busy with kubica's incident. Its a sunday and everyone wants to go home.


That`s a pretty lame excuse.
:rolleyes:

#29 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:19

Originally posted by VicR


Maybe he is and maybe he isn't. Charlie is just a pawn in this game. But truth has this uncanny ability to surface through a sea of lies anyway. Truth usually (not always of course) comes out, especially if stupidity and arrogance have been factors.


Very true, as it did in the SPA court case when Charlie and FIA were found to be fabricating certain facts, in front of a court.

#30 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,755 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:32

Originally posted by peroa


That`s a pretty lame excuse.
:rolleyes:

no it's not...everyone is waiting for a result.
based on the only facts (real ones) you have you give a judgment....this is not a court trial that can take years, you have to provide the answer pretty quick,.
he had a hunch they were lying and look more into it afterward...it's pretty clear he tried to make the case also CRISTAL clear....so there would be no chance mclaren would say it was a misunderstanding..

#31 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,472 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:36

Originally posted by JPW
Anyway I for one understand very well that Charlie Whiting wants to get his 2c in, he has been on the receiving end of McLaren lying, cheating and frivolous protests for some years now.

To quote the infamous Ross S - please STFU.

#32 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:38

Originally posted by peroa


That`s a pretty lame excuse.
:rolleyes:


No its not. To get telemetry and radio info and compile it into a report takes time and people.

#33 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:38

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
To quote the infamous Ross S - please STFU.


Quite and McLaren having also being on the receiving end of charlies lying. Seems to work both ways.

#34 hedges

hedges
  • Member

  • 1,227 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 10 April 2009 - 22:55

My first thought was good on Lewis, he owned up to his shit with Whiting, maybe his public shifting of blame was once again the team line. Anyway, good on him for doing the right thing in the end with Charlie.

My next thought was did Lewis apologise to the team? I doubt that because I doubt any apology would have been due them, they obviously knew what happened even if they didn't instigate it and that isn't really clear either. They are a team who are very precise in their language and the wording from Whitmarsh/McLaren was very different than the off the cuff remarks from Lewis himself and Mario.

It is getting a bit old though.

#35 Gilles12

Gilles12
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:05

So after everything so far what do we know?

In Asutralia
1) Hamilton and Ryan appeared before the stewards and lied
2) This lie was executed in order to secure a podium position at the expense of a competitor and his reputation
3) Other team members of the McLaren staff were aware of the team order to allow Trulli past and must have been aware of the injustice of Trulli's stripped podium
4) Members outside of the core McLaren staff knew of this order (Norbert Haug explicitly described it and Hamilton himself told this to reporters)


In Malaysia
5) In the face of incontrevertable evidence Hamilton and Ryan continued to lie
6) Once exposed Hamilton apologised for lying and laid the blame at his team manager
7) Ryan was sacked


What we have to ask now is

8) Since there were other people in McLaren other than Hamilton and Ryan who knew of the decption why did they not offer counsel to them to come clean?
9) Since we know there were other people inside McLaren who were aware of the deception, did they advise Ryan and Hamilton to continue with their deception?
10) Who are these people who would allow Ryan to become the scapegoat?

So what the FIA, the press and everyone else wants to know is;

11) Was anyone other that Hamilton and Ryan complicit in this deception?
12) If there was, What action will the FIA take against them?

#36 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:15

Originally posted by BrawnsBrain

In fact, I think the whole McLaren pit wall was inplicit in knowing that Hamilton and Ryan had lied. Even Ron Dennis had heard the radio communication requesting Hamilton to move over - so when Trulli was given a penalty later in the day why didn't they ask themselves the simple question: how did Trulli get penalised?


Wait.... it's not fact? :eek:

#37 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:21

Charlie Whiting is a complete puppet for Ecclestone and Mosley.

And he has no credibility on the subject of truth.

He lied and lied after Spa last year.

The man is as ****, just like Mosley. His words mean nothing.

#38 hedges

hedges
  • Member

  • 1,227 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:26

Originally posted by potmotr
Charlie Whiting is a complete puppet for Ecclestone and Mosley.

And he has no credibility on the subject of truth.

He lied and lied after Spa last year.

The man is as ****, just like Mosley. His words mean nothing.

So let me get this right, someone that lies (possibly as a team player/puppet) and continues that line is **** who's words mean nothing?

#39 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:38

Originally posted by hedges

So let me get this right, someone that lies (possibly as a team player/puppet) and continues that line is **** who's words mean nothing?


Someone who is a race official prosecuting drivers on the basis of truth who is himself a complete liar is **** of the earth.

Advertisement

#40 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,616 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:55

Originally posted by BMW_F1
I don't think that data can be provided in 5 minutes. Those guys are understaffed and they were probably busy with kubica's incident. Its a sunday and everyone wants to go home.

Had the incident happened earlier in the race, the investigation would be done without questioning any driver and a drive through penalty would be handed in the race.

#41 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 10 April 2009 - 23:58

Originally posted by alg7_munif

Had the incident happened earlier in the race, the investigation would be done without questioning any driver and a drive through penalty would be handed in the race.


So you are advocating punishment for Trulli even though he did nothing wrong?

#42 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,616 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:06

Originally posted by EthanM


So you are advocating punishment for Trulli even though he did nothing wrong?

He did nothing wrong or did he get his 3rd place because Hamilton was disqualified?

#43 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:08

Originally posted by alg7_munif
He did nothing wrong or did he get his 3rd place because Hamilton was disqualified?


He got 3rd place cause Hamilton and McLaren gave it to him on track. Are you following a different series? I m talking about the F1 Trulli here ..

#44 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:17

Originally posted by BMW_F1
I don't think that data can be provided in 5 minutes. Those guys are understaffed and they were probably busy with kubica's incident. Its a sunday and everyone wants to go home.

The stewards deliberated for over four hours when the protest was filed in Melbourne over the diffusers. Why not pay the same amount of attention over race penalties, especially when there was a podium position on the line, not to mention if they were to issue a non-appealable penalty.

Is it really too much to ask, that the stewards ruling the most expensive and technological advanced sport in the world, should spend more than five minutes to come to a correct ruling?

#45 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,616 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:26

Originally posted by EthanM


He got 3rd place cause Hamilton and McLaren gave it to him on track. Are you following a different series? I m talking about the F1 Trulli here ..

Hamilton moved over out of the racing line, Trulli blasted his way through without any effort to stay behind Hamilton. Trulli then slowed down to let Hamilton pass but Hamilton didn't pass. Without any driver questioning or misleading, who knows what the stewards' decision might be. Afterall they are the same stewards who penalised Trulli without doing their job right in the first time.

Here is the video so that you can think about these questions:
http://rapidshare.co...lli_Onboard.FLV

1) Lewis did move over but did he slow down "a lot, a lot, a lot"?

2) Did Trulli try to stay behind Hamilton or did he accelerate his way through?

3) Did Trulli slow down to let Hamilton pass and did Hamilton accelerate his way through?

#46 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:52

Originally posted by alg7_munif

Hamilton moved over out of the racing line, Trulli blasted his way through without any effort to stay behind Hamilton. Trulli then slowed down to let Hamilton pass but Hamilton didn't pass. Without any driver questioning or misleading, who knows what the stewards' decision might be. Afterall they are the same stewards who penalised Trulli without doing their job right in the first time.

Here is the video so that you can think about these questions:
http://rapidshare.co...lli_Onboard.FLV

1) Lewis did move over but did he slow down "a lot, a lot, a lot"?

2) Did Trulli try to stay behind Hamilton or did he accelerate his way through?

3) Did Trulli slow down to let Hamilton pass and did Hamilton accelerate his way through?


Sure could you answer this question first?

Does the rain in Spain fall mainly on the plain?

It's about as relevant as what you 're asking. Hamilton said he let Trulli past as did McLaren, why are you trying to shift the responsibility to Trulli? It makes as much sense as blaming Button for this.

Stewards after learning all the facts did not punish Trulli which means Trulli's actions were by the book.If they felt Trulli needed to do anything different they could have punished him along with Hamilton when the lies where exposed. It's happened before you know, stewards punishing both drivers involved in an incident.

Besides, even if it was mid race and stewards missed Hamilton pulling to the side and slowing, Toyota has the right to appeal so we 'd still end up where we are.

#47 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,739 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:54

the really sad thing is, it should be mostly irrelivent what jarno and lewis say, and how truilli got past

stewards failed to respond to either team during the race

failed to conduct a decent investigation into what happened

failed to use commen sense and discretion (lewis 3 jarno 4th or other way round)

gave a rediculous penalty to jarno

FIA took up the case that toyota had dropped

lewis is DQ

we are surposed tobe shocked that a competitor lied/withheld information from stewards

jarno isnt reinstated

FIA taking this as far as it can

personaly i think its the FIA taking advantage of the incompertance of the stewards, or "correcting" a stewards orignal mistake of deciding in favour a silver car

#48 P1McLarenMercedes

P1McLarenMercedes
  • Member

  • 175 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 11 April 2009 - 00:58

might it have been possible, charlie, for this incident to have been avoided if you hadnt been to busy with an incident that didnt need attending to anyway, and actually answered the requests of mclaren before the end of the race???

#49 SchumiBoy

SchumiBoy
  • Member

  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 11 April 2009 - 01:02

Originally posted by P1McLarenMercedes
might it have been possible, charlie, for this incident to have been avoided if you hadnt been to busy with an incident that didnt need attending to anyway, and actually answered the requests of mclaren before the end of the race???


McLaren gave him all of 15 seconds before they messed this situation up

#50 P1McLarenMercedes

P1McLarenMercedes
  • Member

  • 175 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 11 April 2009 - 01:05

Originally posted by SchumiBoy


McLaren gave him all of 15 seconds before they messed this situation up

what? The stewards meeting was where they messed up the situation, which was probably an hour after the incident occured. On track, they were trying to be cautious, and it was actually charlie and the whole fia race monitoring system, that have messed the situation up.