104 replies to this topic

[tarmac]

26:30 http://www.jamesalle...pion-interview/

"We all know how ruthless he is. There are things we all know in the paddock in the press but cant talk about alonso. We still love him"

[Ross Stonefeld]

So he knows, admits to it, but won't say it? Or he's just making **** up?

[zdzisio]

26:30 http://www.jamesalle...pion-interview/

"We all know how ruthless he is. There are things we all know in the paddock in the press but cant talk about alonso. We still love him"

There is one even more juicy bit in it. About Kimi.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

Is it a Jimmy Savile type scandal?

[Raelene]

There is one even more juicy bit in it. About Kimi.

what? Can't be bothered listening to the whole podcast

[zdzisio]

what? Can't be bothered listening to the whole podcast

I have no time to look for exact quote right now, but some of them said something like "kimi was always faster than grosjean, of course except for those occasions about which i can't speak publicly". Then everybody laughs like it is obvious why.

[e34]

And yet, they want us to consider them journalists.

So be it. But then, journalism is not what they pretend it to be, but just the profession of people who are the voice of their master and who, once a year, join together and, in a jester-style, tell the truth hidden in laughter.

If this is indeed the truth. Because tomorrow they will tell us another tale.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

Grosjean was faster in french speaking countries?

[zdzisio]

Grosjean was faster in french speaking countries?

Naaah, I would guess the remark was about drinking.

[shonguiz]

And yet, they want us to consider them journalists.

So be it. But then, journalism is not what they pretend it to be, but just the profession of people who are the voice of their master and who, once a year, join together and, in a jester-style, tell the truth hidden in laughter.

If this is indeed the truth. Because tomorrow they will tell us another tale.

A journalist is either a w**re or unemployed.

[peroa]

And yet, they want us to consider them journalists.

So be it. But then, journalism is not what they pretend it to be, but just the profession of people who are the voice of their master and who, once a year, join together and, in a jester-style, tell the truth hidden in laughter.

If this is indeed the truth. Because tomorrow they will tell us another tale.

And y'all figured that one out today?

[eronrules]

what? Can't be bothered listening to the whole podcast

skip to 29:00 mins for kimi bits, nothing really, typically one guy saying after senna, he's the most impressive, how he's comeback to the exact same level that he left in 2009 and some fun on track bits, while another guy ponders why he didn't massa hands down in 08/09 ...

[toxicfusion]

26:30 http://www.jamesalle...pion-interview/

"We all know how ruthless he is. There are things we all know in the paddock in the press but cant talk about alonso. We still love him"

If they don't talk about it because they 'love him' fine, but there has to be members of the press that don't and would have reported on these things if they were a big enough deal.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

F1 is a small community and everybody knows everyone else's business. You would think some rumour about Alonso would have gotten out by now.

The boss of it all - Mr Mosley - had his spanking stories exposed to the world. Maybe Mr E has similar tastes? Perhaps some drivers have issued gagging orders in media circles?

I am very curios about this Alonso thing now. Maybe he used to dress up in S&M gear and spank Felipe around until Felipe found the keys to the handcuffs and escaped from Alonso's dungeon in the Ferrari motorhome?

[e34]

And y'all figured that one out today?

Of course I didn't.

But I am getting tired of reading time and again how Carlos Miquel (anyway, I can't stand the guy, either) is an awful journalist, and there we have the most recognised F1 journalists either making up things out of thin air or trying to come clean after a(nother) year of sword swallowing.

If they know something about Alonso, or Raikkonen, or whomever, worth telling, they should tell it. But playing to the gallery (Alonso the ruthless, Kimi the drunkard) without actually saying a word, only makes Alonso right in his endless quarrel against F1 journalists.

[george1981]

I think it's well known that Bernie has the press under very tight control. If they don't cooperate he'll withdraw their media paddock passes and they'll soon be out of a job. Someone like Martin Brundle might be high profile enough to ask Bernie a few awkward questions and get away with it but even he has to be careful.
The drivers and teams can withhold interviews etc. to certain people they don't like and give scoops to other more favoured journalists if they want to punish someone in the media.
I would guess Alonso might know a bit more about and be more involved in the Spygate and Crashgate scandals than most people know about.

[Nonesuch]

And yet, they want us to consider them journalists.

What they really want is access to the big names because that is what drives traffic to their stories (and probably makes them feel 'part of the club'), so they are rarely if ever really critical. Not that I think F1 merits serious journalistic investigations - at the end of the day it's just a sport, and real journalistic effort and talent is much better put into practise elsewhere - but perhaps the F1 press is better described as announcers or, in a few rare cases, reporters.

That said - I'm sure there are a few fun stories out there. I've never been or worked in a place that doesn't have them.

Edited by Nonesuch, 10 December 2012 - 11:08.

[seahawk]

The Spanish market is not that small, so the truth about Alonso must not come out at the moment. We will later learn that he was the driving force behind spy gate and that he was the driving foce behind crash gate and flag gate as well.

[maverick69]

I think it's well known that Bernie has the press under very tight control. If they don't cooperate he'll withdraw their media paddock passes and they'll soon be out of a job. Someone like Martin Brundle might be high profile enough to ask Bernie a few awkward questions and get away with it but even he has to be careful.
The drivers and teams can withhold interviews etc. to certain people they don't like and give scoops to other more favoured journalists if they want to punish someone in the media.
I would guess Alonso might know a bit more about and be more involved in the Spygate and Crashgate scandals than most people know about.

Indeed. I also believe Brundle came up with the term "Teflonso"

[Tract1on]

I would expect it to be regarding Nelson Piquet's crash in Singapore, Alonso proclaimed his innocence at the time, but i suspect he had more than a little hand in that episode. Perhaps there are more "Alonso" sagas like that, sabotage, scheming and general foul play that we didnt hear about.
Still a great driver though....

Edited by Tract1on, 10 December 2012 - 12:06.

[jstrains]

I would expect it to be regarding Nelson Piquet's crash in Singapore, Alonso proclaimed his innocence at the time, but i suspect he had more than a little hand in that episode. Perhaps there are more "Alonso" sagas like that, sabotage, scheming and general foul play that we didnt hear about.
Still a great driver though....

Like Schumacher

[e34]

What they really want is access to the big names because that is what drives traffic to their stories (and probably makes them feel 'part of the club'), so they are rarely if ever really critical. Not that I think F1 merits serious journalistic investigations - at the end of the day it's just a sport, and real journalistic effort and talent is much better put into practise elsewhere - but perhaps the F1 press is better described as announcers or, in a few rare cases, reporters.

That said - I'm sure there are a few fun stories out there. I've never been or worked in a place that doesn't have them.

I am aware that F1 journalists have to look after their livelihood and trying to be an investigative journalist would endanger that livelihood. In any case, I agree that the subject does not merit serious journalistic efforts. It is just show-biz, and those so called journalists are nothing more, and nothing less, than announcers trying to cheer up the crowds. But taking into account how often people here throw up their hands in horror after every journalistic tale, that opinion sure is not very widespread. I would not be all worked up for something an announcer has said, but people here do, either because they believe what those announcers say, or because they consider that announcers should not be allowed to work as such.

We have had here a thread (referred first to Spanish F1 press, and changed latter to tabloid press) to critizise gutter press practices in F1. There, people lashed out at popular press, while conveniently swept under the rug serious press faux pas. I find highly hypocritical to (deservedly) object to tabloid press F1 information, while not raising any objection to supposedly serious press F1 information.

Leaving aside financial information directly related to Mr. Ecclestone, which could be too hot to handle for somebody whose livelihood depends on getting an access all areas pass from Mr. Ecclestone himself, do we know, five years after the fact, what happened at Hungary 2007? Do we know what happened with Hamilton's gearbox at Brazil 2007? Do we know what happened at Singapore 2008? Has any journalist, ever, bothered to find out whether stewards or scrutineers do really know the rules and how are they supposed to enforce them?

Thanks to the professional work of quality journalists, we know nothing about F1 paddock internal affairs. Well, in fact we know two things: that F1 paddock is ruled by omerta, and that Alonso and Raikkonen stereotypes are true to life. We can take the honest word of those journalists for it.

[Tract1on]

Yes they are quite similiar in that respect. Although in close combat Schumacher was dirty and Alonso isnt.
Off the track, politically, i suspect Alonso is worse than Schumacher.
Again just stating "my opinion"

Like Schumacher

[Clatter]

I am aware that F1 journalists have to look after their livelihood and trying to be an investigative journalist would endanger that livelihood. In any case, I agree that the subject does not merit serious journalistic efforts. It is just show-biz, and those so called journalists are nothing more, and nothing less, than announcers trying to cheer up the crowds. But taking into account how often people here throw up their hands in horror after every journalistic tale, that opinion sure is not very widespread. I would not be all worked up for something an announcer has said, but people here do, either because they believe what those announcers say, or because they consider that announcers should not be allowed to work as such.

We have had here a thread (referred first to Spanish F1 press, and changed latter to tabloid press) to critizise gutter press practices in F1. There, people lashed out at popular press, while conveniently swept under the rug serious press faux pas. I find highly hypocritical to (deservedly) object to tabloid press F1 information, while not raising any objection to supposedly serious press F1 information.

Leaving aside financial information directly related to Mr. Ecclestone, which could be too hot to handle for somebody whose livelihood depends on getting an access all areas pass from Mr. Ecclestone himself, do we know, five years after the fact, what happened at Hungary 2007? Do we know what happened with Hamilton's gearbox at Brazil 2007? Do we know what happened at Singapore 2008? Has any journalist, ever, bothered to find out whether stewards or scrutineers do really know the rules and how are they supposed to enforce them?

Thanks to the professional work of quality journalists, we know nothing about F1 paddock internal affairs. Well, in fact we know two things: that F1 paddock is ruled by omerta, and that Alonso and Raikkonen stereotypes are true to life. We can take the honest word of those journalists for it.

What is the subject matter?

[george1981]

I would expect it to be regarding Nelson Piquet's crash in Singapore, Alonso proclaimed his innocence at the time, but i suspect he had more than a little hand in that episode. Perhaps there are more "Alonso" sagas like that, sabotage, scheming and general foul play that we didnt hear about.
Still a great driver though....

It's been widely reported that Alonso knew that McLaren were spying on Ferrari and he tried to use that information to blackmail McLaren into giving him #1 status. Not only was he going along with the cheating he was attempting to use it to his advantage. His reputation seems to have survived that. I wonder what else he's meant to have done.

[e34]

Indeed. I also believe Brundle came up with the term "Teflonso"

Oh, and Lobato called Kimi an amoeba.

High-risk journalism at its best. Ready to put their jobs on the line, this pair, always looking for the truth, eh?

[matzy]

It's been widely reported that Alonso knew that McLaren were spying on Ferrari and he tried to use that information to blackmail McLaren into giving him #1 status. Not only was he going along with the cheating he was attempting to use it to his advantage. His reputation seems to have survived that. I wonder what else he's meant to have done.

I assumed JA was implying that Alonso was perhaps not quite as innocent as we were told in relation to either or both of Stepney-gate and Crash-gate. I have to admit that I was amazed how Alonso walked away from two of the biggest controversies to hit F1 over the years, relatively unscathed.

Anyway, that would explain why JA is being so coy. To come out and say that, without a wealth of evidence to support such comments, could end up ruining him. That being said, it could be something entirely new, that we don't know about.

[Goron3]

I assumed JA was implying that Alonso was perhaps not quite as innocent as we were told in relation to either or both of Stepney-gate and Crash-gate. I have to admit that I was amazed how Alonso walked away from two of the biggest controversies to hit F1 over the years, relatively unscathed.

Anyway, that would explain why JA is being so coy. To come out and say that, without a wealth of evidence to support such comments, could end up ruining him. That being said, it could be something entirely new, that we don't know about.

It wasn't James Allen that said that in the podcast, it was Darren Heath.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

Makes you wonder how comercially valuable Alonso's face is to F1. If that was a lesser driver like one of the minnows they would have buried that driver.

[Imperial]

Someone like Martin Brundle might be high profile enough to ask Bernie a few awkward questions and get away with it but even he has to be careful.

Martin was threatened by the FIA with not receiving media credentials not so many years ago, albeit under the Mosely regime, following comments made in his newspaper article. That was a fairly big and important story at the time.

Interestingly as far as I recall it was never made clear how things were smoothed over, but Martin received his credentials sure enough. When someone as high profile as Martin is threatened with a paddock ban it's easy to see why virtually none of the F1 media write anything remotely resembling the truth anymore. Nigel Roebuck still does, but on the basis he doesn't attend races as a 'dayjob' anymore I don't think he has first hand experience of a lot of the things that happen, and he pretty much admits as much in Motorsport every now and again. He often uses phrases such as "So I have been told...."

[george1981]

I assumed JA was implying that Alonso was perhaps not quite as innocent as we were told in relation to either or both of Stepney-gate and Crash-gate. I have to admit that I was amazed how Alonso walked away from two of the biggest controversies to hit F1 over the years, relatively unscathed.

Anyway, that would explain why JA is being so coy. To come out and say that, without a wealth of evidence to support such comments, could end up ruining him. That being said, it could be something entirely new, that we don't know about.

There's always been a discrepancy in who suggested Piquet junior should crash, Pat Symonds has said Piquet suggested it himself. Piquet has said that Briatore and Symonds came up with the idea and gave him the specifics of where to crash.
Personally I don't think that Piquet or Briatore would be clever enough to come up with such a plan.

[Imperial]

...do we know, five years after the fact, what happened at Hungary 2007? Do we know what happened with Hamilton's gearbox at Brazil 2007?

Maurice Hamilton's 'Chequered Conflict' book about the 2007 season is, to me at least, as close an admission I've read from anyone involved in following the F1 circus that yes indeed a lot went on behind the scenes that year post-Spygate, without of course revealing too much (the work of the lawyers wand perhaps).

A highly recommended book.

[Watkins74]

So this is the plan.....a new anti-Alonso thread every day until the new season?

[Taxi]

I have no time to look for exact quote right now, but some of them said something like "kimi was always faster than grosjean, of course except for those occasions about which i can't speak publicly". Then everybody laughs like it is obvious why.

Wow... Kimi driving drunk?? or in hangover mode? that's a big accusation implyed.

[Tract1on]

You get the impression that Alonso can think on his feet and wrangle his way out of such predicaments, whereas others might put foot in mouth.
The old Renault regime really looked after Alonso......

Makes you wonder how comercially valuable Alonso's face is to F1. If that was a lesser driver like one of the minnows they would have buried that driver.

Edited by Tract1on, 10 December 2012 - 13:34.

[SophieB]

Martin was threatened by the FIA with not receiving media credentials not so many years ago, albeit under the Mosely regime, following comments made in his newspaper article. That was a fairly big and important story at the time.

Not to really disagree in any way but it was even stronger than that - Brundle's article for The Sunday Times said he imagined that the piece we were reading would probably mean paddock doors would now close in his face but he didn't give a shit any more. What it actually resulted in was The Sunday Times being served with writs for libel from the FIA after Brundle wrote that McLaren in 2007 were the victims of a malicious, politically motivated, FIA stitch up. I forget how it was resolved.

In general though, yeah journos doing the whole 'we'd tell you exciting stories about person X but we dare not' is so maddening. It doesn't make them sound cool and highly connected people in-the-know, it makes them sound gutless. Tell your story properly or don't bother. Plus it encourages people to imagine/fear the worst, often in the process imagining far worse shit than what it eventually turns out is actually being alluded to.

Edited by SophieB, 10 December 2012 - 13:35.

[Coops3]

I mentioned this to a friend of mine who made an interesting point: It may simply be that Alonso threatened to sue journalists for defamation if they dragged his name through the mud. That may be because he's covered his tracks and knows there's no hard evidence to implicate him, or it may just be that he is innocent and doesn't want that fact being questioned.

Btw, the full quote is:

"100% agree with you Mark, and bizarrely, what really strikes me is we all know that, and we all know how ruthless he is and we know there are things in the paddock that we perhaps can't talk about... about Alonso, and yet we still love him, we still all love that ruthlessness don't we?"

[Imperial]

So this is the plan.....a new anti-Alonso thread every day until the new season?

This thread would probably fit better my own (cough cough) 'F1 Racing and media in general' thread, which will be several pages back at the moment. Looks like the OP has chosen an Alonso comment to start the thread, but I would bet he's one of oooh 22 drivers for whom the full truth is rarely reported.

There's so much gone on down the years that's been initially hinted at but swiftly abandoned through fear. Twice I recall tiny hints of possibly massive revelations over firstly cocaine use by at least one (or more) active drivers, back between 1997-1999 IIRC, then latterly there were a few hints at cocaine being smuggled via members of one or more teams, back in the early 2000's sometime. Both times the 'stories' never got beyond the embryonic stage before the realisation clearly dawned on someone to let sleeping dogs lie.

[pdac]

Not to really disagree in any way but it was even stronger than that - Brundle's article for The Sunday Times said he imagined that the piece we were reading would probably mean paddock doors would now close in his face but he didn't give a **** any more. What it actually resulted in was The Sunday Times being served with writs for libel from the FIA after Brundle wrote that McLaren in 2007 were the victims of a malicious, politically motivated, FIA stitch up. I forget how it was resolved.

In general though, yeah journos doing the whole 'we'd tell you exciting stories about person X but we dare not' is so maddening. It doesn't make them sound cool and highly connected people in-the-know, it makes them sound gutless. Tell your story properly or don't bother. Plus it encourages people to imagine/fear the worst, often in the process imagining far worse **** than what it eventually turns out is actually being alluded to.

Divide and conquer (it's Bernie's mantra)

[garoidb]

There's always been a discrepancy in who suggested Piquet junior should crash, Pat Symonds has said Piquet suggested it himself. Piquet has said that Briatore and Symonds came up with the idea and gave him the specifics of where to crash.
Personally I don't think that Piquet or Briatore would be clever enough to come up with such a plan.

Why would Piquet keep quiet?

[showtime]

If it's Darren Heath then you can know what he mean by "there are things in the paddock that we perhaps can't talk about", just check his blog entry for the last GP. Pure BS anyway, just food for trolls.

[Rinehart]

JA shouldn't have really singled out FA about an obvious embargo against publicly exposing any leading driver on any matter, which would obviously damage the sport and therefore the income...

[Clatter]

JA shouldn't have really singled out FA about an obvious embargo against publicly exposing any leading driver on any matter, which would obviously damage the sport and therefore the income...

He shouldn't single anyone out in this manner unless he has the proof and is man enough to report it properly, but the last bit is irrelevant. A journalist should report the facts and not worry about how it might affect the sport.

[Rinehart]

[/b]

He shouldn't single anyone out in this manner unless he has the proof and is man enough to report it properly, but the last bit is irrelevant. A journalist should report the facts and not worry about how it might affect the sport.

Not if they want to keep their paddock passes, lets be realistic. F1 is just a sport.

[pUs]

And yet, they want us to consider them journalists.

So be it. But then, journalism is not what they pretend it to be, but just the profession of people who are the voice of their master and who, once a year, join together and, in a jester-style, tell the truth hidden in laughter.

If this is indeed the truth. Because tomorrow they will tell us another tale.

Absolutely worthless "journalism". But then again, there appear to be no real journalists within F1 at all. No integrity and apparently quite happy just to be part of the circus.

[Goron3]

[/b]

He shouldn't single anyone out in this manner unless he has the proof and is man enough to report it properly, but the last bit is irrelevant. A journalist should report the facts and not worry about how it might affect the sport.

Just to clarify, he didn't single anyone out. It was Darren Heath who did and the conversation moved away from it straight afterwards. Heath is a bit of knob tbh, I've never been a fan.

[george1981]

Why would Piquet keep quiet?

I think Piquet has suggested that Alonso was atleast in the know, something along the lines of why would he go for such an different strategy unless he knew what had been planned. During the days of refuelling if a faster car had a problem in qualifying the general consensus was to fuel it heavy and one stop, especially on a street circuit like Singapore. Alonso two stopped and made the first stop, Piquet suggested that for Alonso to go along with that strategy he'd have to be in on the conspiracy.
Perhaps Alonso suggested the idea to Briatore who then suggested it to Piquet? That way Piquet wouldn't have direct evidence against Alonso.

[Taxi]

Sure Alonso knew. But is that realy surprizing? Think not. He's relenteless, he's the killer. Might as well others deal with that.

[wrcva]

what is the big deal? Of course journos cannot talk about this stuff, and if they do they cannot watch Monaco sitting in a rooftop hot-tub, while sipping their champagne...

Didn't Max give Fred sort of get-out-of-jail-free-pass in Crashgate for his assistance in Spygate, serving Ron's head on a silver platter, his biggest enemy. Max tried to get rid of Ron for years without success but Fred's emails took care of the job in one move. When you think about it, these are the top two scandals in the history of F1, taking out two of the key characters Ron, and Flav... and Fred is the key witness granted immunity by FIA in both cases for his testimony. Fred wasn't even investigated in Crashgate, per Max, as he concluded there was no need to proceed with any detailed investigation about drivers beyond crash telemetry (as Flav was already in the bag)... Piquet Sr. always said Fred was involved in the planning. Massa claimed there was evidence about his involvement, only to take those statements back the following day...

Ecclestone later talked Mosley down from banning McLaren for two years (“bit heavy”, he said) and instead imposing a record $100 million fine. Mosley joked that it was “$5 million for the offence and $95 million for Ron being a twat”. Ecclestone book

[aditya-now]

It wasn't James Allen that said that in the podcast, it was Darren Heath.

Darren Heath has his own very pointed POVs, if you care to look at his website. Go to the blog and you will find some extraordinary pieces.