f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

I think they will go well in China and Japan (Fuji is like a mini Spa in some ways), but Interlagos is a bumpy old ride and the McLarens seem better suited to the less smooth surfaced tracks.

Devildog

In the real world (as opposed to the law according to the FIA) it is basic corporate responsibility.

Ferrari, through the actions (is it still allegedly?) of Nigel Stepney, a senior employee, allowed the data to fall into McLaren's hands. They have a duty of care not to do that.

The irony here is that in a real court of law, McLaren would most probably not be guilty of anything.

Before I go on, I would like to say that I would like to see Kimi win the championship. What car he is driving is irrelevant.

But let's not forget that much of this is believed to have originated from the whistleblowing (by Stepney?) of Ferrari's illegal (?) parts at the start of the season.

Anyway - here's a conspiracy theory for you.

Ferrari knew and allowed the information to go to McLaren, just to **** them over if the season wasn't all going Ferrari's way

Hell, maybe even Jean Todt put the stamp on the envelope....

Leslie

Yes I had twigged that of course but thought I would make a bit out of the fact that he felt it necessary to point out my typo in such an ill mannered way!

I never object to polite criticism however.

Les

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

An interesting post. Agree about the court of law, but this is to do with a set of sporting regulations not the law and hence while McLaren have been found guilty of breaking the sporting code they have not been found guilty of breaking any laws although sadly I feel Ferrari may still try and pursue that line of enquiry in the future.

Whistleblowing is an interesting term. If Stepney had gone to the FIA about the Ferrari parts then I would agree with you, but it appears he went to McLaren chief designer and they both tried to use iut for their own personal gain with Honda and the rest is history. The 'illegal' parts are a backcovering sideshow and nothing more.

The F2007 in Australia passed scrutineering and hence was a legal car. Before the next race the FIA were asked to look at two devices on the car which they said while not technically in breach of the regulations were not in the spirit of the sport and hence introduced new tests to make them illegal. Ferrari removed the devices before the second race of the season. This is much the same as is seen often in F1 e.g. McLaren's extra brake pedal, BAR's brake bias system and somewhat controversially Renault's mass damper.

Agree entirely that Ferrari need to look very carefully at their internal procedures regarding IP, but at the same time I doubt whether they would hand over the entire design spec of the car if it were a setup, there are cleverer ways to set someone up than that. Nice theory though.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

No worries, but learn to spell it properly in future you t**t

Leslie

Les

EddScott

What I would like to know is this.

Say for instance, although no proof can be found, that this years McLaren car has parts of its design influenced by what they knew of the Ferrari, what about Prodrive who are supposed to be buying this years McLaren chassis?

OK, its not illegal but they could be buying a car not built "In the spirit" of the sport.