Eddie Irvine seems to think so:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/h ... t/formula_one/8460480.stm

@ 00:53 "The problem with F1 is, they keep changing things to try and make it better when there was really nothing wrong in the first place."

Is it desirable, or even possible to go back to the way things were?

:nurse: "Thaaat's it, come along now Mr E; these gentlemen will take you to a safe place."

Quote from tristancliffe :

Exactly. Renault didn't confess. Symonds did, after he left the team.

Quote from samjh :

... It might seem like I'm splitting hairs ...

lol

OK. One of the main protagonists who was part of the team at the time of the incident and was involved it it's inception, later confessed.

Seriously though, I thought the main reason for Flavio's appeal was simply that the FIA didn't have the power to issue him with a lifetime ban, whatever the verdict.

Quote from samjh :

Renault did NOT confess! Renault simply chose not to contest the allegations, which is not the same thing as a confession.

Pat Symonds' admission

"The FIA has released a letter written by Symonds, and addressed to the Council, which was read out during the meeting in mitigation.

Symonds wrote: 'I was the one who, when the idea was first suggested to me by Nelson Piquet Jr, should have dismissed it immediately.

'It is to my eternal regret and shame that I did not do so. I can only say that I did it out of a misguided devotion to my team, and not for any personal gain whatsoever."

From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/h ... t/formula_one/8440675.stm

"BBC Sport understands the FIA will launch an appeal against the decision."
A waste of time?

"The new FIA president, Jean Todt, has also talked about setting up a new disciplinary process to deal with similar incidents."
Wow, good idea!

Quote from el pibe :

a remark for those who posted above..... its Briatore not Briatori

OP title corrected.

Thanks.

Quote from tristancliffe :

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80743

Overturned.

So, sounds like the FIA were attempting to act on principle (or on a personal vendetta, according to Flavio) rather than in strict accordance with the rule book.

You'd have thought there was a line in the rule book somewhere saying "Thou shalt not conspire to crash thy car deliberately", wouldn't you?

Although obviously difficult to enforce due to the burden of proof, one assumes there is no such a rule, as proof wasn't even needed in this case; Renault confessed.

Here's the latest on Flavio's situation with the result of his appeal imminent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/h ... t/formula_one/8440675.stm

Notwithstanding the final decision when it arrives, I'd be interested to know what people here think about this situation.

In all honesty, I can't figure out whether he should be banned for life or not.

The thing is, the thought of a team and/or driver deliberately crashing a car is scary. Obviously it's potentially very dangerous and it's certainly not in the true spirit of the game, so to speak.

However, is this behaviour any worse or more dangerous than one driver 'accidentally' colliding with another, in an attempt to either hinder his progress or end his race altogether?


EDIT:

A couple of collision examples.


Schumacher and Villeneuve in 1997:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/ ... ks-comebacks-and-regrets/

Meanwhile Schumacher has again reiterated that the greatest regret of his career is the deliberate collision with Jacques Villeneuve in Jerez 1997, which cost him the world championship and his reputation,

“I have some moments that if I could have them again, yes I would do them differently – probably 1997 in Jerez, ” he said. “I would have had a couple of opportunities to avoid all this and still win the championship, but you take your lessons and you learn from them.”


... and the infamous Senna vs Prost incident at Suzuka in 1990:

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/200 ... reatest-f1-videos-part-x/

The sequel to the 1989 encounter, and to many there more shocking of the two because of the speed at which Ayrton Senna took Alain Prost out of the race. Without a moment’s hesitation or regard for the safety of Prost, himself or any of the other drivers, Senna rammed Prost off at the first corner of the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix to win the championship. It was outrageous, but there was nothing the FIA or its incandescent President Jean-Marie Balestre could do to punish him.

Senna's radical move was inspired by his dormant fury at what had happened in 1989, and fuelled still further by his outrage at having won pole position for the race, but not being allowed to exercise what had been the fastest driver’s right to choose which side of the grid he started from. Senna reasoned that if Prost gained an advantage at the start, the responsibility for the consequences did not rest with himself. Dangerous reasoning.

Last edited by dungbeetle, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 23:36.

Quote from tinvek :

have you considered a move into politics ?

No fear, bro - those guys are waaay outa my league!

Quote from trebor901 :

the one person in sport that deserves a knighthood is Ross Brawn. He's been given an OBE so at least he's being recognised.

OK, it's confession time.

When it comes to Ross Brawn, I see exactly what you're saying. He has done some fantastic things in motor sport. His success with Ferrari was one thing, but what he managed to achieve with Brawn last season was simply amazing and he seemed to do it all with such humility.

I guess that what he has achieved could easily be described as wonderful source of inspiration to others, which alone would justify the receiving of an Honour.

Dunno - maybe the 'official' criteria for receiving Honours need to be broadened a bit in order to move with the times, as sports and entertainment are now so prevalent in people's lives?

Oh dear, it now appears I have double standards. :worried:

Quote from sinbad :

Not much point in singling out Button then is there

Fair comment.

Apologies if it came across that way. My intention wasn't to single him out, more to cite him as a recent example.

Quote from trebor901 :

i always find it funny how UK is full of twats that moan when we dont have a british champion in something and as soon as we do they run them into the ground with stupid remarks about them not deserving it. Would you think the same if you'd worked for years and years to win something? no didnt think so

Hmm, I just read my posts again and can't seem to find where I said that Button (or Hamilton or Hill for that matter) didn't deserve to be Formula 1 World Champions.

I always find it funny how the UK is full of twats that try and put words into your mouth.

Quote from sinbad :

If Chris Hoy gets a bleeding Knighthood for being able to ride his bike real fast, then I think a meagre MBE for a British F1 World Champion is not at all unreasonable.

Please, don't get me started on the whole Honours for "Sports Personalities" thang ...

... unless you're just a lowly racing driver, then I think you should only get a flash.

Quote from Shotglass :

sure your point is valid but lets be honest... in 500 years wholl know the difference?

Maybe you should have said 1000 years, because the Honours list originated during Edward III's reign back in the mid 1300's.

Apparently there are still records of those Honours today (some 600+ years later).

Quote from thisnameistaken :

I don't know. It doesn't really matter though, does it? You go to the palace, get your badge, say hello to the queen briefly and bugger off home again. It's not like an MBE is anything more than a day out.

Sure, when it comes to life the universe and everything, then no, I guess the Honours List doesn't really matter that much.

But when you take Hamilton's, Hill's and Button's Honours in context with some others, it just makes me wonder.

For example, here are a couple of recipients who, IMHO, were deserved of them:

John Carpenter, MBE

John Carpenter was awarded an MBE for services to disabled people in Berkshire, Cornwall and nationally, in the Queen's Birthday Honours List 2007.
He has used his knowledge and skills as an engineer to design and build devices for disabled people which are not available on the commercial market.
He does this work through Remap, a network of volunteer craftsmen and engineers working to help disabled people go about their lives.


George Loble, MBE

George Loble was awarded an MBE for services to the Women's Cancer Detection Society in Gateshead and to the community in Newcastle upon Tyne, in the Queen's Birthday Honours List 2007.
He is Chair of the Women's Cancer Detection Society and has worked tirelessly to raise funds for equipment and research.

Hopefully you can see the point I'm trying to make.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Hamilton got an MBE for winning the WDC, Hill's got an OBE, presumably he had an MBE for winning the WDC but I can't remember.

Hell, even my driving instructor had an MBE and he didn't win shit!

Maybe your driving instructor did something selfless and outstanding for his local community and hence he deserved it.

Hamilton and Hill, like Button, are/were paid handsomely for taking part in a sport they love, while receiving help from others to achieve their own personal goals. Don't get me wrong, they are indeed magnificent sporting achievements, but are such activities really deserving of an Honour?

Last edited by dungbeetle, Wed 30 Dec 2009, 13:25.

Full Story

Erm, sorry, I'm a huge fan an' all that, but why?

MBE

Awarded for:

• achievement or service in and to the community of a responsible kind which is outstanding in its field or
  
• very local 'hands-on' service which stands out as an example to others
  

Ah, now this would explain his sudden change of heart:

BBC intereview with Michael Schumacher on his signing with Mercedes here (video):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/h ... t/formula_one/8427552.stm

Gentlemen, if you would kindly walk this way:

To The Great F1/Karting Debate thread

OK, have at it, chaps!

Quote from Intrepid :

On topic

Ferrari must be freekin' seething. They've kept Schumacher in the F1 loop while he has been in 'retirement'. Got that free test last year!

For sure Alonso to Ferrari was an issue, but Schumacher is a savage. quality!

I guess that driving for Mercedes must have really appealed to him.

Maybe when you've been there and done that seven times already, there needs to be something different and/or special involved.