Cheat Briatore wants to get back into F1 ..

[Andyuk911]

I suspect it has more to do with the football club ...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/art...

[FNG]

Much as I'm one of Flav's many anti-fans, I think he has a point - it is an absurdity to be handed a lifetime ban when the driver who was complicit got no punishment whatsoever.

5 years, 10 years even, I can agree with. Effective life ban is vindictive and unprecedented.

I actually find myself feeling faintly sorry for Flav, even though I think that on balance the pitlane is a better place without him.

[welshbikerduck]

FNG said:

Much as I'm one of Flav's many anti-fans, I think he has a point - it is an absurdity to be handed a lifetime ban when the driver who was complicit got no punishment whatsoever.

5 years, 10 years even, I can agree with. Effective life ban is vindictive and unprecedented.

I actually find myself feeling faintly sorry for Flav, even though I think that on balance the pitlane is a better place without him.

I think F1 is better without him, but lets say he does get a 5 year ban instead of a lifetime ban. Exactly which sponsor would be pleased he is in the team they have their logo emblazened on?

[LanCat]

To be fair to the orange one, unless you are one of spanky's boys he's the "alleged cheat".

[FNG]

welshbikerduck said:

FNG said:

Much as I'm one of Flav's many anti-fans, I think he has a point - it is an absurdity to be handed a lifetime ban when the driver who was complicit got no punishment whatsoever.

5 years, 10 years even, I can agree with. Effective life ban is vindictive and unprecedented.

I actually find myself feeling faintly sorry for Flav, even though I think that on balance the pitlane is a better place without him.

I think F1 is better without him, but lets say he does get a 5 year ban instead of a lifetime ban. Exactly which sponsor would be pleased he is in the team they have their logo emblazened on?

Which is fine, because market forces and negative PR will do their jobs and keep him out of racing for as long as the public and sponsors feel is reasonable and appropriate.

When that time (and a 5 year ban for example) is over, and he wants to come back to it and is welcomed by sponsors and fans alike, as far as I'm concerned he's suffered his punishment and everyone can look forwards and get on with racing again.

[hot metal]

I wonder how many young drivers have heard " if you no doa as I saya you noa work ina formula 1 again"

I think he`s a git , good riddance.

[Derek Smith]

The's a good Pitpass article, Morality, on the subject of Briatore being allowed to manage and employ drivers. I can't think why the FIA/Mosley allowed it. I mean, even if they were buddies, good mates, then it was still so open to abuse that someone would have mentioned it.

[mattikake]

hot metal said:

I wonder how many young drivers have heard " if you no doa as I saya you noa work ina formula 1 again"

I think he`s a git , good riddance.

+1

He's also been a cheat since he took over a Benetton. Illegal traction control? Fuel rig rigging? Ignore black flags? And that was just when he was initially teaching Schumi how to behave...

The less I see of those dirty sweaty 'pits at lunchtime, the better.

[C Lee Farquar]

I've always felt he should have been banned as soon as he wore a baseball cap back to front in the pit lane.

[TonyToniTone]

mattikake said:

He's also been a cheat since he took over a Benetton. Illegal traction control? Fuel rig rigging? Ignore black flags? And that was just when he was initially teaching Schumi how to behave...

Maybe you could do us a? video? collage?

[flemke]

mattikake said:

hot metal said:

I wonder how many young drivers have heard " if you no doa as I saya you noa work ina formula 1 again"

I think he`s a git , good riddance.

+1

He's also been a cheat since he took over a Benetton. Illegal traction control? Fuel rig rigging? Ignore black flags? And that was just when he was initially teaching Schumi how to behave...

The less I see of those dirty sweaty 'pits at lunchtime, the better.

That wouldn't by any chance have been the same Benetton team of which Saint Ross was the Technical Director, would it?

[DJC]

flemke said:

mattikake said:

hot metal said:

I wonder how many young drivers have heard " if you no doa as I saya you noa work ina formula 1 again"

I think he`s a git , good riddance.

+1

He's also been a cheat since he took over a Benetton. Illegal traction control? Fuel rig rigging? Ignore black flags? And that was just when he was initially teaching Schumi how to behave...

The less I see of those dirty sweaty 'pits at lunchtime, the better.

That wouldn't by any chance have been the same Benetton team of which Saint Ross was the Technical Director, would it?

That amuses me

Whilst he was at Ferrari and masterminding Schumi over the years St. Ross was kicked from left to right on ph. He was the epitome of Ferrari evil.

Suddenly ph is calling for him to be knighted.

[thunderbelmont]

Not only was St.Ross at Benjaminton at that time, so was The Master (Mr Walkinshaw-can't-even-lay-straight-in-bed). You will find that controversy follows Mr W almost everywhere he goes - though he'd say it was his interpretation of the rules as read at that time, or that Charlie said they could probably do it perhaps maybe over a cup of coffee.

Somehow I don't think Flav has a leg to stand on. He's appealing in a French Court, and to the views of that country he has brought the name the top French motor racing team into disrepute.

He has more chance of pushing the water back up Niagra falls with a garden fork.

[Bombjack]

DJC said:

Whilst he was at Ferrari and masterminding Schumi over the years St. Ross was kicked from left to right on ph. He was the epitome of Ferrari evil.

I don't remember that at all. Can you recall anything in particular?

[DJC]

Bombjack said:

DJC said:

Whilst he was at Ferrari and masterminding Schumi over the years St. Ross was kicked from left to right on ph. He was the epitome of Ferrari evil.

I don't remember that at all. Can you recall anything in particular?

Oh yes. Quite a lot of posts and threads actually. Schumi, Brawn and Todt were the unholy trinity.

[Fire99]

Well I think the whole story is tainted with more aggendas than a general election.

I think the irony is of the FIA passing any kind of judgement where my gut feeling is that their motives are as far from Sporting as you can get.

[Wanta996Gotta]

DJC said:

Bombjack said:

DJC said:

Whilst he was at Ferrari and masterminding Schumi over the years St. Ross was kicked from left to right on ph. He was the epitome of Ferrari evil.

I don't remember that at all. Can you recall anything in particular?

Oh yes. Quite a lot of posts and threads actually. Schumi, Brawn and Todt were the unholy trinity.

Its a fact, he was. And again, like some posters praising Mr Blah,Blah man Rubens as a good loser Mr Brawn also has allot of previous questionable baggage though we dont know who was pulling the strings at the time. His views on what was legal with regards to floor boards,fuel pumps and traction control are still up in the air to this day.

Dont get me wrong, done a great job this year with the double diffuser and deserves the praise BUT lets not go overboard.

[IainT]

I'd like to think that Brawn pushed things as far as possible within the rules but didn't go beyond them. In all liklihood he probably pushed byeond the rules to the point that he thought reasonable or justifiable!

Briatore, on the other hand, pushed beyond a point that even he could think to justify.

In reality I fear that many in F1 would go to any lengths to win and Briatore just happens to be bad enough at it to get caught.

[peenut]

Regards Ross Brawn, there’s a difference pushing the technical boundaries as far as they will go (IIRC barge boards being 10mm too big, “sorry it was a manufacturing error” this in a business where a 1000th of a millimetre is standard unit of measurement ) versus actually telling a driver to crash at a specific time and point to the advantage of another team member.

Every team has, and will, at some point push the technical boundary – BAR and their extra fuel tank anyone – as that’s what they can do to get that extra 10th second per lap. Seem to recall Renault had a lovely front mass damper which was inside the regs (or not even covered by them) until Ferrari complained and got it banned. Pushing the boundary or cheating? Until the regulators say it’s cheating then it’s not.

Not saying that Brawn (the man) is innocent and I’d love to read an honest autobiography from him, but to me there’s a bit of a difference between a driver being instructed to crash (which in itself is different from driver deciding to park on the track or hit a rival) and team breaking/bending tech regs.

[4rephill]

peenut said:

Regards Ross Brawn, there’s a difference pushing the technical boundaries as far as they will go (IIRC barge boards being 10mm too big, “sorry it was a manufacturing error” this in a business where a 1000th of a millimetre is standard unit of measurement ) versus actually telling a driver to crash at a specific time and point to the advantage of another team member.

Every team has, and will, at some point push the technical boundary – BAR and their extra fuel tank anyone – as that’s what they can do to get that extra 10th second per lap. Seem to recall Renault had a lovely front mass damper which was inside the regs (or not even covered by them) until Ferrari complained and got it banned. Pushing the boundary or cheating? Until the regulators say it’s cheating then it’s not.

Not saying that Brawn (the man) is innocent and I’d love to read an honest autobiography from him, but to me there’s a bit of a difference between a driver being instructed to crash (which in itself is different from driver deciding to park on the track or hit a rival) and team breaking/bending tech regs.

A bit like Ferrari's flexible floor that everybody screamed was cheating and the proof was that they had to modify it when the the test weight for the floor was increased. Only problem for all the accusers was that the floor passed all the tests and was therefore legal at all times required. When the weight for the test was increased, the floor was modified to suit the new test.

Or when Ferrari were accused of using traction control when it was banned. Until the FIA investigated and found that what they had cleverly done for every corner on ever circuit, was to work out the exact point when traction would be lost and had the engine cut power before it could happen. As the FIA reported, traction control is a "reactive" system whereas what Ferrari had was a predictive system that was perfectly legal.

However, back on topic:

Briatore's punishment would have been a lot lighter if he hadn't kept insisting that no meeting took place and that he was not invovled, when at least three other people confirmed that the meeting had taken place and he was there.
The FIA took a dim view to being lied to and punished him accordingly ( even Bernie said Briatore should have just put his had up and admitted it instead of trying to bluff his way out of it. Had he done that he would have recieved the same punishment as Pat Symonds, i.e a 5 year ban).