Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 4 votes

Massa suspects Alonso knew about crashgate..


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
256 replies to this topic

#151 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,901 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 10 January 2014 - 09:45

To vent frustration of having worked with Alonso all of these years?  (Now that he is free to speak about it)

Agree with this and your last post about the gap between PR and reality.

Drivers contracts specifically ban the disclosure of confidential & derogatory information concerning their teams, sponsors, the FIA, FOM and partners. 



Advertisement

#152 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 10:50

what the actual f...? :eek:

please show me just one person who said that Alonso & co did it to rob Massa of his WDC!

Reading comprehension issues again?

What do you think is Massa insinuating by bringing up Alonso knowing about this five years after the fact. He has been very vocal to single out Piquet crash at Singapore as the culprit of his wdc loss.

Edited by fabr68, 10 January 2014 - 10:56.


#153 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 4,982 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:00

Reading comprehension issues again?

What do you think is Massa insinuating by bringing up Alonso knowing about this five years after the fact. He has been very vocal to single out Piquet crash at Singapore as the culprit of his wdc loss.

and you're talking to me about reading comprehension issues? :rolleyes:

 

yes, Massa brought it up that he thinks Alonso knew about the team 'tactics' to fabricate a win for him. you turned that into Massa saying that Alonso masterminded the team tactics just to purposely rob Massa of his WDC. :lol:



#154 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:19

Massa's opinion is based on the idea that if it weren't for Piquet deliberately crashing to bring out a SC that would benefit his teammate Alonso, Ferrari would not have had to make a unscheduled pitstop at that time and might not have made that error in the originally-planned stop.

 

I think Massa has reason to be aggrieved... that crash put every team in panic mode as happened in those SC periods at the time where there was a mad rush to get into the pits and out again lest you lose places in the queue or track position to those who stay out. Ferrari like all teams were making an unscheduled pitstop without the usual preparation that would go into a planned one... hence the probability of an error going massively up... fate saw it that Ferrari and Massa were the ones to suffer.

 

Felipe probably would've won that Grand Prix but for that incident.

 

I agree, but as a competitor in F1 you do not have a reasonable expectation that your rivals will not cheat. You have a reasonable expectation that the governing body will spot egregious examples of cheating and take action against the cheats. Once Renault had decided they were going to crash on purpose, everyone's race was affected by that, and I just don't think there was any question of the FIA, even if the cheating had been detected and dealt with on the day of the race, attempting to balance out the effect of the SC on everybody's race and resetting everything to the way it would have been if the SC hadn't come out. It's just not possible.

 

From the point of view of everybody except Renault, it's rather like Hockenheim 2000 when that mentaloid walked onto the track - the guy was a wally and the thing should never have happened - but from the competitors' point of view the resultant SC was just a random factor of the kind that can crop up in motor racing, like rain, which everybody has to deal with, and which inevitably conferred an advantage on some and a disadvantage on others. You don't hear Mika Hakkinnen complaining that he had a massive lead and the SC ended up costing him the win because it meant, when it rained, that he couldn't pit for inters and rejoin in front of Barrichello.

 

The only difference with Singapore is that Alonso should have been disqualified as he gained a massive advantage because his team knew (and maybe he knew as well) when the SC was coming and timed their pitstop to take maximum benefit from it. But as far as all the non-Renault runners are concerned, I'm afraid the SC was just one of those things, and if you lost out as a result of it, that's just tough luck. Especially if you release your car with the fuel hose still attached because, although that probably wouldn't have happened under normal circumstances, it was a clear case of Ferrari contributing significantly to their own problems.



#155 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:40

Alonso and his car broke no rules. Though I'd have stripped the team of the constructor points and hit them with a massive penalty. 

 

I know the line in the ISC about "Acts prejudicial to the interests of any competition or of motorsports generally" is often derrided as a "catch-all" provision but, ultimately, if one competitor starts the race knowing the SC is coming out on a certain lap, and everyone else starts the race not knowing that, that's an absolutely cast-iron case of the competition being compromised, or prejudiced. It gave Alonso such a massive advantage that he was able to win a race in a car that wasn't even remotely competitive. I really don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect a car to be disqualified for what Renault did with Alonso's car that day. It's just that disqualifying Alonso wouldn't have helped Massa - in fact it would have heaped more pain on Massa by handing an extra two points to Hamilton.


Edited by redreni, 10 January 2014 - 11:41.


#156 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:06

Look, Alonso started that race with only 6 laps of fuel in his tank....do you truly, TRULY believe that Alonso was not informed how much fuel there was and also why? The whole team was build around him and Briatore was his manager and Alonso is not stupid to not to ask any questions.....I truly find it hard to believe that there still are people who question whether or not Alonso knew about it....are people really this naive?

Really? It is then truly amazing that he didn't have his first pit stop till lap 12. How do you think he managed such feat?

 

We could have a much more meaningful discussion about this and other matters if people would please double check their facts before making statements like the one I bolded in the post above. I have similarly read other posts stating that it was obviouls that Alonso was witness X, with others having to point out that witness X had been identified as Alain Permane - and even after some provided the relevant quotes on that point, others came back with the same "witness X was Alonso". That can only keep us going on circles.

 

Piquet's point has always been that it was against Symonds and Briatore's interest to have Alonso involved, because their main goal was to keep him as a driver for 2009 through getting him to believe that he could still win races with Renault. The strategy of being short fuelled was very aggressive, but Alonso was very open about it on Spanish TV just before the race - he basically said that given their starting position there was little they could do but to gamble on an early SC (by the way, references to strategies that took into account a potential SC were constant in 2008, in every race). During the formation lap, Piquet almost lost the car in exactly the same turn where he later crashed - even more amazingly, Grosjean crashed on exactly that same turn in 2009, when the Crashgate scandal was already out (if you have the chance, please do see the footage and Bob Bell's face on the pitwall as he realises Grosjean has binned it in "Piquet's corner" - he truly doesn't know whether to laugh or to cry!). And, as others have said before, in the pre-podium room Alonso openly said "we only won because of the SC", which is a weird thing to say if you know of the plan and want to make it work.

 

So I am one of those who think that Alonso wasn't involved in Crashgate, not because he is whiter than white but because his involvement would have been against what the plot tried to achieve. And I saw nothing weird about his strategy at the time, in the same way that I thought nothing strange when Ferrari announced in 2010 that Alonso would stop on his first lap after starting from the pitlane.

 

Now, I am sure that as rumours started to fly all over the paddock regarding Singapore, Alonso heard of them. I don't know when was that, exactly, or whether he tried to find out whether it was true or not that Piquet crashed on purpose. What I know is that Piquet Sr has stated that he went to Whiting at the Brazil GP to ask him about the matter, and he was told that Piquet Jr needed to make a statement for FIA to be able to do something about it - which I find very strange, since they launched enquiries on McLaren in both Monaco and Hungary in 2007, and as far as I know never needed a formal statement by any of the McLaren drivers in order to do so.


Edited by Fontainebleau, 10 January 2014 - 12:11.


#157 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 2,986 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:06

I think Alonso knew about it AFTER the event.

 

The race was occuring, his team mate crashes and he finds himself in the lead and then wins. Previously his best results were meagre points that year. He must have gone 'hang on a second!!!!....how did THAT happen?"



#158 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:16

I think Alonso knew about it AFTER the event.

 

The race was occuring, his team mate crashes and he finds himself in the lead and then wins. Previously his best results were meagre points that year. He must have gone 'hang on a second!!!!....how did THAT happen?"

Don't forget that the R-28 had very good results in general from Hungary onwards - Alonso was always among the top 4, with the exception of his retirement in Europe. He knew the car had improved, and in fact in Singapore he was left out of Q3 only because his car failed - until then he was doing fine. And he went on to win the next GP in Japan, with Piquet 4th on that same race.

I am sure he heard the rumours, but I don't think it was the car's performance that made him suspicious.

As for his teammate not finishing a race - that was hardly an unfrequent event in 2008! ;)


Edited by Fontainebleau, 10 January 2014 - 12:18.


#159 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 358 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:45

Oh dear, what a topic...Felipe really should start to look forward.

 

Whether Alonso knew or not, what would have changed for Massa anyway?



Advertisement

#160 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 773 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:54

I think Alonso knew about it AFTER the event.

 

The race was occuring, his team mate crashes and he finds himself in the lead and then wins. Previously his best results were meagre points that year. He must have gone 'hang on a second!!!!....how did THAT happen?"

With the incident or not, Alonso's pace that weekend was great, probably as fast as the Ferraris and McLarens. Once on the lead, he commanded the race confortably.

 

But still, this is old stuff now...nothing new.



#161 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 339 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:54

I think Alonso knew about it AFTER the event.

 

The race was occuring, his team mate crashes and he finds himself in the lead and then wins. Previously his best results were meagre points that year. He must have gone 'hang on a second!!!!....how did THAT happen?"

 

I too think he wasn't involved in the planning of this, but being a pretty smart guy must have strongly suspected what happened. There were probably at least small clues from before the race with strategy planning and after the event he must have remembered those and thought there is something very fishy. He was also already very familiar with Briatore's attitude and had been in the middle of a huge scandal a year before, he was not some naive rookie and I am sure he was very alert and aware that everything is possible.



#162 KirilVarbanov

KirilVarbanov
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:55

Great topic to fill the empty time in the pre-season. Not. 

 

If we try to over-simplify the matters - this is a driver interview, hence he has to be asked about his driving. 



#163 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 2,041 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:58

But it is apples and oranges between incidents and purposeful illegal activity against other teams. 

 

The point, I suppose, is that Massa (and Ferrari) can complain all the want about Renault's cheating in Singapore, but the fact is that their lacklustre performance in other races put them in a position where one bad race could cost them the championship. They had only themselves to blame for 'incidents' like the dumb DNF in Malaysia, or making an engine that couldn't last the race in Hungary. To take an entire season and lash out at the one incident where other people's scheming made things difficult for them seems to me to be very immature, and a sign that Massa still hasn't completely dealt with the no doubt dramatic events of that season finale in Brazil.


Edited by Nonesuch, 10 January 2014 - 12:58.


#164 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,743 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 10 January 2014 - 13:09

the championship isn't won or lost in any spin, engine failure, crash of somebody etc. It's a combination of all of them. It ended up close, there are a lot of what ifs. 

 

Alonso should have been DQ and should have had a further penalty if proven he knew about it. We can speculate all we want, if he knew or not. I have my guess he did but it's just my opinion. 

 

Under no circumstances should the WDC be altered. I doubt Massa wants it altered also. He is just pissed of on somebody cheating like that. Michael got a lot of bad PR for the moments he tried to cheat his way into a better position but Alonso somehow seems above this incident. Personally, i believe he didn't know just as much as I believed michael lost the car in rascasse. I think the chances are similar



#165 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,234 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 10 January 2014 - 13:38

Really? It is then truly amazing that he didn't have his first pit stop till lap 12. How do you think he managed such feat?

 

 

Half of the circuit is downhill.



#166 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 762 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 10 January 2014 - 14:28

What? When?

 

 About half the starts of 2013.



#167 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,752 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 10 January 2014 - 15:11

If Alonso knew or not, we´ll probably find out eventually. I think the team and drivers should have been dsq from that race though.



#168 Gag Bueno

Gag Bueno
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 10 January 2014 - 15:21

It's a really strange time to bring it up. I guess there are some sour grapes there.

 

I suspect Massa knows it's one of the things Alonso hates to hear discussed in the press...

 

More than being bitter after 5 years, or complaining (at least he didn't in the last interview ) about the lost WDC 2008 I think Massa is trying to make some news ( as almost all of them do... ) and, for instance, trying to take advantage of the negative image Alonso has with many Brazilian F1 fans, after China and Hockenheim 2010 not so difficult to understand ...



#169 RB1

RB1
  • Member

  • 51 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 16:33

Alsonso strikes me as a guy who would want to control everything and would question every decision in the briefings, especially on things like race strategy. 

 

Massa, who has worked with Alonso for four years, has seen first hand how Alonso acts when discussing race strategy. So, I think Massa probably questions how Alonso didn't know about crashgate, since Alonso had such a strange strategy for Singapore.



#170 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,506 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 January 2014 - 16:47

Alonso certainly knew about it, but FIA didn't have the balls to question him and ban him for years. Having said that, Massa doesn't help himself by thinking these old things. It shows a weak mind.



#171 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 17:08

If Alonso knew or not, we´ll probably find out eventually. I think the team and drivers should have been dsq from that race though.

 

Absolutely, whether he knew or not, personally I don't see why it matters. If he didn't know, he still should have been disqualified because whoever decided his starting fuel load certainly knew. And if he did know, I don't see why that would have resulted in any further punishment on top of disqualification.

 

As far as I know there's no suggestion that it was his idea; at worst he merely went along with, i.e. he didn't go running to the FIA to tell tales on his own team, which is something that I doubt any driver on the grid would do anyway. In that sense, his involvement was at best peripheral - the plan didn't require Alonso actively to participate in it other than by accepting the decision to short-fuel his car for the start of the race.

 

The way I see it, even if it were to emerge that he did know about it, he would still come out of it with cleaner hands than did Hamilton from the lying incident in Melbourne. It may have been Dave Ryan's idea to deceive the stewards, but Hamilton not only knew about it but actively participated in the deception. He got a DQ, and that was the only punishment directed specifically at him. There was also a three race ban suspended for a year, but that was for the team, not Hamilton. So for me, the notion that Alonso would have suffered a similar punishment to Symmonds and Flav had he been implicated is wide of the mark.



#172 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 906 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 17:14

I´m sure alonso knew about it. He is still close friends with Briatore isn´t he...that tells something. Someone else would have thought twice about continuing business with the guy who is risking things by cheating



#173 redviper22

redviper22
  • Member

  • 89 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 10 January 2014 - 17:15

Alonso certainly knew about it, but FIA didn't have the balls to question him and ban him for years. Having said that, Massa doesn't help himself by thinking these old things. It shows a weak mind.


Erm the FIA hired a detective superintendent of 30 years to question him in August 2009.

Edited by redviper22, 10 January 2014 - 17:22.


#174 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 2,986 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 10 January 2014 - 17:17

It's poor form from Massa. I thought him and Alonso were 'ok' with each other; not friends but got on fairly well.

 

Alonso though, is a guy that can give you 100% from the machinery but also demands 100% from you to get your 100% in return. 

 

Really what Felipe should have done is bask in the glory that his new found 'freedom' has given him free from Ferrari's shackles and get on and enjoy life. These past 4 years would have been mental torture but now is his chance to break free from that; not to dwell on it or hold grudges like Woobens did with Michael etc.

 

Look at Eddie Irvine, he knew he was #2, admitted it and it didn't affect him mentally. He knew he wasnt as good as Schumacher and didn't attempt to be either. These other guys DO think they are as good as Schumacher/Alonso etc and get spanked week in week out and come back begging for more. Then when the dust settles they say "I coulda had him!!!"



#175 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 1,029 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 18:40

 Alonso was cleared. If Massa has some new information the FIA wasn't privvy to, he should share it with them...or shut up with those allegations!

Alonso was not cleared at all, he was never tried. Mr X was granted immunity. That is given to people who would not have been cleared. Had they been tried.


Edited by ardbeg, 10 January 2014 - 18:41.


#176 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,884 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2014 - 18:41

I agree, but as a competitor in F1 you do not have a reasonable expectation that your rivals will not cheat. You have a reasonable expectation that the governing body will spot egregious examples of cheating and take action against the cheats. Once Renault had decided they were going to crash on purpose, everyone's race was affected by that, and I just don't think there was any question of the FIA, even if the cheating had been detected and dealt with on the day of the race, attempting to balance out the effect of the SC on everybody's race and resetting everything to the way it would have been if the SC hadn't come out. It's just not possible.

 

From the point of view of everybody except Renault, it's rather like Hockenheim 2000 when that mentaloid walked onto the track - the guy was a wally and the thing should never have happened - but from the competitors' point of view the resultant SC was just a random factor of the kind that can crop up in motor racing, like rain, which everybody has to deal with, and which inevitably conferred an advantage on some and a disadvantage on others. You don't hear Mika Hakkinnen complaining that he had a massive lead and the SC ended up costing him the win because it meant, when it rained, that he couldn't pit for inters and rejoin in front of Barrichello.

 

The only difference with Singapore is that Alonso should have been disqualified as he gained a massive advantage because his team knew (and maybe he knew as well) when the SC was coming and timed their pitstop to take maximum benefit from it. But as far as all the non-Renault runners are concerned, I'm afraid the SC was just one of those things, and if you lost out as a result of it, that's just tough luck. Especially if you release your car with the fuel hose still attached because, although that probably wouldn't have happened under normal circumstances, it was a clear case of Ferrari contributing significantly to their own problems.

 

The Hockenheim 2000 example is very good. From what I remember, that random guy did it on purpose, since McLaren-Mercedes was leading the race with a huge margin and he was a sacked former Mercedes employee. In the end he got what he wanted, because cars were packed up and McLaren didn't win the race. But just because someone deliberately cheats or alters the results, you are not going to cancel or delete the whole event. You can punish only the cheat. By the way, 2012 USA grid manipulation was also a deliberate action, which influenced a few more drivers than just Ferrari's own.



#177 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 10 January 2014 - 18:47

We could have a much more meaningful discussion about this and other matters if people would please double check their facts before making statements like the one I bolded in the post above. I have similarly read other posts stating that it was obviouls that Alonso was witness X, with others having to point out that witness X had been identified as Alain Permane - and even after some provided the relevant quotes on that point, others came back with the same "witness X was Alonso". That can only keep us going on circles.

 

Just a few post below:

 

 

Alonso was not cleared at all, he was never tried. Mr X was granted immunity. That is given to people who would not have been cleared. Had they been tried.

 

:lol:

 



#178 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • In the running for best OP of 2014

  • 3,305 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 18:58

Look at Eddie Irvine, he knew he was #2, admitted it and it didn't affect him mentally. He knew he wasnt as good as Schumacher and didn't attempt to be either. These other guys DO think they are as good as Schumacher/Alonso etc and get spanked week in week out and come back begging for more. Then when the dust settles they say "I coulda had him!!!"

:up:

In my personal experience on games and such, it's always those who are just a small bit below the top level that feel they have the most to prove. The guy(s) at the very top and those far beneath them don't seem to have a problem admitting they were beaten, but when you get to the people who usually come in second or just behind, they're always full of excuses or reasons they aren't first place. Has been happening in F1 over the past few years, but I don't think I need to draw anyone a picture.  ;)

#179 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,884 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:04

:up:

In my personal experience on games and such, it's always those who are just a small bit below the top level that feel they have the most to prove. The guy(s) at the very top and those far beneath them don't seem to have a problem admitting they were beaten, but when you get to the people who usually come in second or just behind, they're always full of excuses or reasons they aren't first place. Has been happening in F1 over the past few years, but I don't think I need to draw anyone a picture.  ;)

 

It is not easy to live in no-mans-land. Even fans on the forum keep debating whether a driver is Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 1.5.

 

Being absolutely rubbish can be relatively easy in comparison. :p  Just take a look at Taki Inoue's twitter, where he is making jokes of himself!


Edited by sopa, 10 January 2014 - 19:04.


Advertisement

#180 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:17

I agree, but as a competitor in F1 you do not have a reasonable expectation that your rivals will not cheat. You have a reasonable expectation that the governing body will spot egregious examples of cheating and take action against the cheats. Once Renault had decided they were going to crash on purpose, everyone's race was affected by that, and I just don't think there was any question of the FIA, even if the cheating had been detected and dealt with on the day of the race, attempting to balance out the effect of the SC on everybody's race and resetting everything to the way it would have been if the SC hadn't come out. It's just not possible.

 

From the point of view of everybody except Renault, it's rather like Hockenheim 2000 when that mentaloid walked onto the track - the guy was a wally and the thing should never have happened - but from the competitors' point of view the resultant SC was just a random factor of the kind that can crop up in motor racing, like rain, which everybody has to deal with, and which inevitably conferred an advantage on some and a disadvantage on others. You don't hear Mika Hakkinnen complaining that he had a massive lead and the SC ended up costing him the win because it meant, when it rained, that he couldn't pit for inters and rejoin in front of Barrichello.

 

The only difference with Singapore is that Alonso should have been disqualified as he gained a massive advantage because his team knew (and maybe he knew as well) when the SC was coming and timed their pitstop to take maximum benefit from it. But as far as all the non-Renault runners are concerned, I'm afraid the SC was just one of those things, and if you lost out as a result of it, that's just tough luck. Especially if you release your car with the fuel hose still attached because, although that probably wouldn't have happened under normal circumstances, it was a clear case of Ferrari contributing significantly to their own problems.

2008singaporegrandprixraceprogress_all.g

 

Indeed it would have been impossible to sort out the massive impact of Piquets crash/safety car.  Had this been discovered as cheating on the day of the race or before the next race then the best decision imo would be to throw out the race results and given Renault a race ban for 'x' races.  Look at the chart after lap 15, quite a mess with a 'new' race starting on lap 19. There would be no way to make this right as everyone was affected, and Massa sadly the most of all.

 

Also about Alonso, imo the cheating was all about making Alonso happy.  He was having a good Friday/Saturday (fastest in P2 and P3) until the car failed and he would have been very harsh on the team to do something to make it up to him in the race.  They came up with the 'plan' and I would think that Flavio would have informed Alonso of what was going to happen.  Alonso might even have been very impressed with the lengths the team would go to keep him happy!

 

Spanish-driver-Fernando-Alonso-of-Renaul


Edited by halifaxf1fan, 10 January 2014 - 19:40.


#181 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,445 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:55

I agree, but as a competitor in F1 you do not have a reasonable expectation that your rivals will not cheat. You have a reasonable expectation that the governing body will spot egregious examples of cheating and take action against the cheats. Once Renault had decided they were going to crash on purpose, everyone's race was affected by that, and I just don't think there was any question of the FIA, even if the cheating had been detected and dealt with on the day of the race, attempting to balance out the effect of the SC on everybody's race and resetting everything to the way it would have been if the SC hadn't come out. It's just not possible.

 

From the point of view of everybody except Renault, it's rather like Hockenheim 2000 when that mentaloid walked onto the track - the guy was a wally and the thing should never have happened - but from the competitors' point of view the resultant SC was just a random factor of the kind that can crop up in motor racing, like rain, which everybody has to deal with, and which inevitably conferred an advantage on some and a disadvantage on others. You don't hear Mika Hakkinnen complaining that he had a massive lead and the SC ended up costing him the win because it meant, when it rained, that he couldn't pit for inters and rejoin in front of Barrichello.

 

The only difference with Singapore is that Alonso should have been disqualified as he gained a massive advantage because his team knew (and maybe he knew as well) when the SC was coming and timed their pitstop to take maximum benefit from it. But as far as all the non-Renault runners are concerned, I'm afraid the SC was just one of those things, and if you lost out as a result of it, that's just tough luck. Especially if you release your car with the fuel hose still attached because, although that probably wouldn't have happened under normal circumstances, it was a clear case of Ferrari contributing significantly to their own problems.

 

That is not the only difference.  Not only did Renault participants know what was going to happen, having planned it, they were also competitors carrying it out, not a 3rd party loser wandering onto the track and impacting all of the innocent competitors. 

 

I agree with you in as far as teams contributing to their own problems - that cannot be accounted for, and I agree 'tough luck'.

 

I think at this stage Massa is angry that this purposeful cheating MAY have cost him the title.  Over the season many incidents and circumstances contributed to his final tally - but Singapore was known purposeful cheating.  I think Massa was angry at all the cheaters and they were all sanctioned in his mind - except for Alonso - who Massa believes knew of the plot, but was not sanctioned and retained the spoils of the cheating (like bank robbers jailed for robbing a bank and one goes free for lack of proof AND gets to keep the money! What?)

 

Massa can achieve nothing when it comes to the sanctioning of Alonso because either he was innocent, there was not sufficient proof that Alonso knew about it, or the FIA decided to overlook his involvement.  If Alonso was guilty, then Massa would have a right to pursue having Nando's win removed from the official record.  However, there are two considerations: 

 

                      1.  The FIA probably won't do so. 

 

                      2.  Nobody in racing discusses that win without being snide about it, making fun of it, bringing it up to taunt and shame Nando (i.e., after Hockenheim), joke about it when discussing how hard it is to pass at Singapore, "but Alonso did it and won from 15th!", etc., etc., so it remains a notorious win, a mar on Alonso's record that only he (and perhaps some of his cohorts at the time) seem to appreciate.  In light of that, Massa  may want to leave well enough alone and allow the race stand as a continued reminder to Alonso that all did not find his Singapore win as nifty as he seemed to.


Edited by bourbon, 10 January 2014 - 20:20.


#182 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 906 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:55


 

 

Spanish-driver-Fernando-Alonso-of-Renaul

 

And the Oscar goes to...



#183 Coops3

Coops3
  • Member

  • 1,579 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 20:26

It seems deeply unsatisfying to me that we don't know the truth, and perhaps never will. I'm really surprised to see so many people suggesting it should just be left to lie. Either he's innocent, in which case what Massa has said is outrageous, or he's not, in which case he should be reprimanded (formally - not by some wooly notion of his name already being tarred).



#184 Outsider

Outsider
  • Member

  • 495 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 20:48

 About half the starts of 2013.

8 races from 19 is not even close to nearly half. bad maths you have



#185 genespleen

genespleen
  • Member

  • 343 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 10 January 2014 - 21:21

Not sure what Massa hopes to achieve by raising this now. It was five years ago, even if he had proof of Alonso's knowledge of Crashgate, nothing will change in terms of the race result or the championship as the 2008 season has long finished. If he is trying to make Alonso look like the bad guy, then most of us already have our thoughts on Alonso's involvement (or lack of) in Crashgate and without further evidence, then those feelings are not going to change.

 

I was appalled with the whole Crashgate mess at the time, but there comes a point when you need to move on. I can see why Massa may hold a grudge if he thinks it took away a world championship, but the 2008 season was 18 races long, so many things could have affected that championship one way or another. I think Massa's energy would be better placed on focusing on his new challenge with Williams rather than bring this all up again.

 

From the limited amount of the interview available, it doesn't sound like it's Massa who's "raising this now."  It seems like he was asked, and responded.  



#186 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,094 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 January 2014 - 21:35

8 races from 19 is not even close to nearly half. bad maths you have

 

It's 84% of half.



#187 JimiKart

JimiKart
  • Member

  • 357 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 10 January 2014 - 21:55

It's 84% of half.

 

I'd say that pretty close then...

 

Massa, still bleating on... to me that's a joke. Seems to me Flav wanted to keep fred happy, what better way than giving him a win, especially considering how they the team screwed up the race before and the issues in Singapore in quali. Na fred didn't know shit until after... suck it up filpe and move on, some of you guys should do the same,.



#188 Jvr

Jvr
  • Member

  • 757 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 21:58

There was a discussion prompted by Luca's comments before the Christmas where Alonso was lifted among the greats. It is funny how short lived the minds of men are.

This whole Singapore 2008 episode combined with all events in 2007 are reasons why I refuse to elevate Alonso to be one of the greats regardless of how many Championships he brings to Ferrari (so far none). Let's remember that the verdict of the World Motorsport Coucil was announced just few days prior to Singapore 2009 GP and yet Alonso insisted the decision was just an "interpretation" of the events and it did in his view not dismay his victory at all. Also what he did in 2009 Singapore GP was to dedicate his 3rd place podium to Briatore regardless of that Flavio had been just few days ago been found to be the main contributor of the arguably biggest scam in the F1 history.

Edited by Jvr, 10 January 2014 - 22:03.


#189 Boxerevo

Boxerevo
  • Member

  • 1,934 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:01

Alsonso strikes me as a guy who would want to control everything and would question every decision in the briefings, especially on things like race strategy. 

 

Massa, who has worked with Alonso for four years, has seen first hand how Alonso acts when discussing race strategy. So, I think Massa probably questions how Alonso didn't know about crashgate, since Alonso had such a strange strategy for Singapore.

I missed this line of thinking... very interesting one.



#190 st99

st99
  • Member

  • 379 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:04

In my opinion, Alonso didn't know it before it happened because if he knew he wouldn't have said to Briatore  in the pre-podium that the safety car helped him win the race, afterwards I'm not sure.

 

For me, the only bad thing about Alonso's involvement in all this was saying that he still counted that win as good as the others and that "the cheating" was only a interpretation because he still had to keep the position the safety car had given him.



#191 RockyRaccoon68

RockyRaccoon68
  • Member

  • 1,431 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:46

In my opinion, Alonso didn't know it before it happened because if he knew he wouldn't have said to Briatore  in the pre-podium that the safety car helped him win the race, afterwards I'm not sure.

 

For me, the only bad thing about Alonso's involvement in all this was saying that he still counted that win as good as the others and that "the cheating" was only a interpretation because he still had to keep the position the safety car had given him.

 

As far as he is concerned, his win is as valid as Rosberg's second place.  He had nothing to do with causing the safety car, therefore as far as he is concerned it is no different to him than a random safety car.  Slightly strange logic but I'll give it to him that he did drive well that weekend.



#192 PoleMan

PoleMan
  • Member

  • 1,549 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:50

Alonso was not cleared at all, he was never tried. Mr X was granted immunity. That is given to people who would not have been cleared. Had they been tried.

Great to see how closely you've been following this thread...even this page. Keep it up!



#193 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,290 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:55

This whole Singapore 2008 episode combined with all events in 2007 are reasons why I refuse to elevate Alonso to be one of the greats regardless of how many Championships he brings to Ferrari (so far none). 

If you are going to hold such moral standards against drivers, then who you consider to be great will be a very short list.

 

People can crow on about, "well that is different" or "apples and oranges" or whatever other wishy washy opinion they have, but I think to be fair we have to take into consideration that other greats like Senna, Schumi, Prost and others did things that were questionable, in some cases unlike Alonso they were proven.

 

If seems to myself that some posters are selective when they bring up morals, so they can suit their own agenda, then hide behind the "apples and oranges" argument. Alonso as I said was a mad man in 2006-2008 time, and did do some questionable things, I agree, but to say those reasons are not why he is a great driver. is something I can not agree with at all.


Edited by sennafan24, 10 January 2014 - 22:56.


#194 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,506 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 January 2014 - 23:15

Massa, still bleating on... to me that's a joke. Seems to me Flav wanted to keep fred happy, what better way than giving him a win, especially considering how they the team screwed up the race before and the issues in Singapore in quali. Na fred didn't know shit until after... suck it up filpe and move on, some of you guys should do the same,.

Thinking about if the Singapore didn't happen, and if Alonso had stayed at Renault, Renualt might have stayed in F1, backed the team instead of Red Bull, Alonso might already have a couple championships more, considering how well the Lotus has been doing with a limited budget.

 

The dirty games backfired :blush:


Edited by Mauseri, 10 January 2014 - 23:17.


#195 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 2,648 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 11 January 2014 - 00:02

I´m sure alonso knew about it. He is still close friends with Briatore isn´t he...that tells something. Someone else would have thought twice about continuing business with the guy who is risking things by cheating

 

Like Michael did, they never had the relation like before after Michael left Benetton, Michael never talks about Briatore, like he is talking about Ross or Jean Todt, despite he was the guy who gave him the chance to have a winning/championship car in the first place. He even did say the tactics (we know who decided those "tactics"at Benetton were one reason he left to Ferrari in an interview years ago. 

 

. By the way, 2012 USA grid manipulation was also a deliberate action, which influenced a few more drivers than just Ferrari's own.

 

You comparing 2012 USA to Crashgate? Ferrari did nothing wrong in 2012, because it was allowed move, like enforcing team orders, perhaps not the finest trick, like abuse time wasting in football, but fully legal. Crashing the car into the wall deliberately, is/was not right?



#196 JimiKart

JimiKart
  • Member

  • 357 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 11 January 2014 - 00:03

Thinking about if the Singapore didn't happen, and if Alonso had stayed at Renault, Renualt might have stayed in F1, backed the team instead of Red Bull, Alonso might already have a couple championships more, considering how well the Lotus has been doing with a limited budget.

 

The dirty games backfired :blush:

What part of "Fred didn't know before the race" do you not understand, there's nothing to backfire on Fred, he didn't know and certainly wasn't going to cheat for a few points in a lost season - flav and the boys wanted a victory to fred in order to keep him happy within the team, when fred figured it out afterwards so what... what was he supposed to do.

 

That's rubbish about "Renault not backing red bull" and "what if Singapore didn't happen" - red bull won with Newey's car despite the fact it had a Renault engine, they won because it was Newey's car.



#197 st99

st99
  • Member

  • 379 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 11 January 2014 - 00:11

As far as he is concerned, his win is as valid as Rosberg's second place.  He had nothing to do with causing the safety car, therefore as far as he is concerned it is no different to him than a random safety car.  Slightly strange logic but I'll give it to him that he did drive well that weekend.

 

 I don't think it's comparable with Rosberg's race at all. He didn't have anything to do with the safety car but his team did, and he was fueled and pitted on a perfect lap to help him get into the first place because they knew that accident would happen, so no, it's not as it was a random safety car.



#198 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 11 January 2014 - 00:55

As far as he is concerned, his win is as valid as Rosberg's second place. He had nothing to do with causing the safety car, therefore as far as he is concerned it is no different to him than a random safety car. Slightly strange logic but I'll give it to him that he did drive well that weekend.

Alonso counts the win as valid because he did not know about it. So in his mind the win was earned.

People are outraged at a crash changing the outcome of a race. Yet Senna purposly caused a crash to change the outcome of a championship. Somehow that was proper, heroic and ethical racing.

I think this is just an excuse for people who hate Alonso by sinking their nails in the sewer with hopes they can find something to throw at him.

Not even the FIA can change the results of 2008 Singapore now.

Instead of crying about Singapore, Massa should remember Monza 2006, where he got Alonso a bullshit penalty. Karma can be a beotch sometimes.

Edited by fabr68, 11 January 2014 - 01:05.


#199 MP422

MP422
  • Member

  • 1,811 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 11 January 2014 - 07:32

I'm certain he was in on it as well, After the race a lot of us were saying it was a dirty race and we got a lot of blow back only to be vindicated by Piquet. I understand Massa's view regarding this incident. To deny his opinion or even his belief that it cost him a title is warranted. I do not favor Massa in anyway and glad he didn't win the title but i can't overlook what position that planned execution of the safety car put the Ferrari team in.



Advertisement

#200 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,866 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 11 January 2014 - 07:53

(off topic) The funny thing about that was in the ITV race buildup they showed an interview with Hamilton in which he said (in reference to his pass on Massa at Germany) "Nobody passes me round the outside like that". Then came turn 1 of the Hungarian GP...  :rotfl:

 

(on topic) Massa - No point crying over spilt milk. Get on with it.

 

pfff.... easy for you to say. A man lost his best opportunity for getting the ultimate result of his career. He would have been remembered and respected much more in the future if he was WDC.

 

 

For YOU it's just some crap that happened 5 years ago.

 

 

 

IT'S NOT THE SAME THING!!!! CAN YOU IMAGINE?