Whether Ferrari have 'engineered' this episode in order to 'secure an easy title' - I think it highly unlikely. However, being reasonable, if for one moment we entertain this 'preposterous' proposition of yours:
1)The negative consequences for Ferrari should they be found out far out weigh any positives of an 'easy title'. For example Mclaren got found out and look how much it has cost them - $100 Million and the need to go into a defensive position on the Ferrarilife Forum.
>>>>>
I have nothing to do with McLaren. I am a sportsman and I think that this is unfair punishment for something which as yet is almost an unknown affair. Was it fair of Schumacher to drive into Hill early in his career or for him to just break down where he did in Monaco ?
Where were the large fines then ?
I am an F1 fan merely concerned this will attract the wrong sort of attention to the sport, and even people who are normally non-fans are asking me to explain how the fine could be so high.
You should have a debate about the sportsmanly conduct of the Mclaren team members.
As you say, an element of espionage takes place naturally. Remember, McLaren's car does not have any device which means they are cheating, this is not even a car issue at all, it has to do with the ownership o fintellectual property, and a civil court is the correct place for that to be settled.
The punishment fits the crime. As far as I am aware Ferrari are addressing the issue in the civil courts as well. As for MCLAREN'S CAR not having any CHEATING devices, well that remains to be seen, unless ofcourse you are in possession of confidential technical information belonging to Mclaren. In which case I would urge you to return these to Mclaren immediately (you did mention that you have nothing to do with Mclaren?).
Ofcourse the other way a team could CHEAT is acquire a superior rival teams technical bluprints, say through your chief designer, and try and use them on your car
2) To engineer this kind of situation one would need to be 100% certain that any subsequent investigation would not yield any cracks - virtually impossible. For example Coughlans ineptitude revealed Mclarens possession of the documents belonging to Ferrari.
You can only accuse Coughlan of ineptitude if his role was as a spy. He did not try to conceal anything so his release was not inept. His role in the matter was to produce a schematic for the FIA which was later used to get Ferrari's flexible floor design banned. That is not ineptitue but skill.
In my opinion, Coughlan was skillfully inept on two counts.
Firstly taking what was quite clearly confidential information belonging to Ferrari to a photocopying shop - duh!
Secondly if he did not try to conceal anything, why did it require a Police investigation to reveal the theft of information - why did he not do the honourable or 'Sportsmanlike' thing and either refuse the information from Stepney in the first place or hand it back to Ferrari when he knew that was where it came from. That would have been the gentlemanly thing to do.
The other person in my opinion who has demonstrated ineptness is Mclaren's CEO, does he not know what goes on at the highest level of his organisation? or maybe he does?
3) You must be relatively new to F1. If you go back to the 70's & 80's Ferrari went through a very poor period performance wise compared to Mclaren, Williams and others. Ferrari do not need to engineer an 'easy title'.
Your patronising attitude must have lost you many friends.
I remember those days well. They are hardly relevant to Ferrari having a flexible floor these days, one which has since been banned
I have no friends that is why I spend my time responding to frivolous comments such as these.
It is simple, Ferrari know how to lose, Mclaren obviously do not. In any event you keep mentioning the flexible floor - that was a grey area that Ferrari exploited until it was made clear that it was out of bounds i.e. banned. But until it was banned it was acceptable - Mclaren just didn't think of it first or couldn't make it work or whatever - sounds like sour grapes to me!
4) As for Stepney - probably just another human being who succumbed to the sin of avarice - Mclaren has a load of surplus cash too.
That's a serious allegation of which you have no evidence. Surely you are feeling the need to engineer a win here.
Read it again dude - it is not an allegation, it is just an observation on humanity. It makes no difference to me - I am a world away.
5) I think it is just you. Ferrari do not need 'to win back some public support' they have the TIFOSI and I agree it does stink of hypocrisy and corruption, or rather, Stepney, Coughlan and Mclaren
.
They worked at getting an illegal device banned from the Ferrari. and Ferrari have managed to get them punished by making them losing title victory points as a result. Industrial espionage is not a job for a governing body of any sport to deal with. The implications are far greater.
This is as much an empowerment exercise for the governing body as it is abotu anything else. one ownders if they will now look backwards at other cases where their previous involvement has been negligible, adn if they will stay in the same frame of mind for the future. As it is nobody at McLaren has anything to worry about, their car has been ruled to be legal all season
As I recall it is the FIA who issued the fine and cancelled the points. Not Ferrari. Personally I think Mclaren got away lightly.
Mclaren did not complain about the flexible floor to the governing body out of altruism for the sport, they did it out of self interest. They just couldn't compete. The govening body in its wisdom listened to Mclaren and issued clarification of the rules. Now I wonder who benefitted from the governing body's decision that day? Why! it was Mclaren
The Ferrari has been legal all season too - it passed all the FIA tests before the races - otherwise they could not race. You cannot deem something to be illegal just because you don't like it or can't compete with it. When the FIA make the rules clear then the teams comply, as Ferrari have done - you cannot have compliance before the parameters are set. That means you have already decided what the rules will be - and you are in no position to make those rules. What a way to kill innovation!
Now I am off to the Chinese resto for some chicken noodle soup and beef chow mein - which I will savour all alone without any friends, oh $hit - I have to buy for the rest of the family!!
.
