Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
From grandprix.com
In recent days we have received (unsolicited) communication from Nigel Stepney which raises a number of questions which have not been touched on in the scandal to date. Stepney says that he believes Ferrari have been let off surprisingly lightly by the FIA. He says that there is a point that everyone is missing because they are assuming that the flow of information to Mike Coughlan was a one-way flow and that Ferrari did not gain anything. There is no evidence at all that Stepney was being paid to pass on information and he says that it was rather more simple than that. "I got information about when they [McLaren] were stopping," Stepney says. "I got weight distribution, I got other aspects of various parts of their car from him [Coughlan]. Ferrari got off very lightly. I was their employee at the time. I was aware of certain stuff they were doing at tests, fuel levels, for example. I knew what fuel level they were running. I think they should have been docked points personally. The question is: Did I use the information, did I talk about it?' That's the big question. I spoke to some people about it. I can't prove it, there are no e-mails or anything. Points about the fuel and the differences [between Ferrari and McLaren] were discussed inside. As well as McLaren having an advantage, did Ferrari have an advantage? I think so." So is Stepney surprised that Ferrari got off entirely without penalty? "Very surprised," he says. "It looks like information flowing only one way. No one has been balancing the argument. No one has asked the question. They were thinking Mike was asking the questions and I was answering them." Stepney, one can argue, is a source that is seen to be somewhat tainted given all the allegations that have been made in Italy. But they are only allegations at the moment. Nothing has been proved in a proper court of law and until it is he has as much right to make his feelings known as Montezemolo. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
From grandprix.com ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
F1 needs a huge blow to clean itself. Don't you worry, it will survive, become a sport again and maybe they won't do the same mistakes again. |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
I think what's happened has served as a huge wake-up call, but transfers of information in one way or another will always go on, if not in the form of that from Ferrari to McLaren (and maybe the other way). |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
Information is exchanged when engineers change teams, but when the info changes hand without employee transfer it is illegal because the information leak goes on for as long as it isn't found out and the infos are always up to date, which isn't the case when we talk about employees leaving to work for another team. Every team on the grid has been guilty to some extent of what McLaren were done for. OK, a 700 page manual is pretty comprehensive but what about a set of aero schematics or an engine blueprint instead. Whenever anyone moves to a competitor, they usually stuff what they can down their pants. I believe NS in this case because it is not only plausible but logical that they were sharing data. We all know in our heart of hearts that it goes on but Max had an axe to grind and grind it he did. I think it's time to put a line underneath this thing for the good of the sport. I'm not happy that McLaren were dealt with this way but I see no benefit whatsoever in exposing Ferrari and Renault in the same manner. It was a bitter pill that has been swallowed and for the good of F1, I hope it ends there and no other team is dragged through the mire. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
If a basis for credibility is found, I think McLaren should have their points restored and the fine lifted. Then McLaren and Ferrari could both be fined, say $5 million each and have all the teams admonished that this sort of thing will stop, now.
Possibly Stepney himself told Coughlan that the sliding floor was designed to pass the static test that the FIA was using at the time but if the FIA knew how it really worked, they would ban it. You could argue that Ferrari intentionally used an illegal device, like Toyota's rally air intake. However, since it did pass the FIA tests at the time, it is wrong to say it was illegal or cheating on the part of Ferrari. |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
If a basis for credibility is found, I think McLaren should have their points restored and the fine lifted. Then McLaren and Ferrari could both be fined, say $5 million each and have all the teams admonished that this sort of thing will stop, now. 5 millions is no where a hard enough fine to stop them cheating for the win when money they receive for winning is way more than that. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
If any of this is true, then Ferrari should be held to account. However, there is the question as to any verfiable email traffic and the content of the messages, that could be independantly demonstrated to have this type of information flow such as the FA emails where the content was actually available the article seems to suggest that there is not, but that is not clear and seems based on NS statements in the article, that there is not....... |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
If it is proved that Ferrari used McLaren data to the same extent as McLaren did with the Ferrari data than Ferrari should also lose their points and get the hefty fine. If it's true , and as damning a dossier of evidence , they should be thrown out , along with McLaren . Fines do nothing . Chuck both and send a real message . Let them come back next year , and forget about the stupid suggestion that either be checked for the other's intellectual property or parts . But , let's find out if this isn't just an accused thief throwing red herrings at us . Let's see those e-mails and text messages , too . We know how fond these guys are of electronic communication . |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
If it is proved that Ferrari used McLaren data to the same extent as McLaren did with the Ferrari data than Ferrari should also lose their points and get the hefty fine. ![]() ![]() then a Quid Quo Pro is likely !!! ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
You know, as more teams use wind tunnels and computers to design their cars, sooner or later it's going to end up being a nearly identical car. Airfow doesn't lie. |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
I thought this thread is about how Ferrari should be banned following these "last moment revelations" from Nigel Stepney that are made public by www.grandprix.com who's editor couldn't refrain from completing Nigel's empty threats with some precious (read biased) [indications].
I take a look and what do I find? A playground! We got to the point where McLaren fans are accusing Spyker that they did what the McCheats were doing this season. All this without the slightest proof (because ones thoughts and dreams are rarely facts)! ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
I thought this thread is about how Ferrari should be banned following these "last moment revelations" from Nigel Stepney that are made public by www.grandprix.com who's editor couldn't refrain from completing Nigel's empty threats with some precious (read biased) [indications]. ![]() This thread is about Stepneys comments, not about Spyker or it's designer. Keep it that way. |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
![]() Stepney's confession... that he accepted McLaren's technical information and shared it with his fellow workers while still employed with Ferrari... Simply tosses Ferrari into the same mud wrestling pit as McLaren by... Bringing the sport into "Disrepute" !!! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|