Stepney: Information Flowed Both Ways!!!

I know you guys will have a field day with this ,so let the arguments begin.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19720.html
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.

 

If so far nobody asked the question its because it was either very well done or because he never shared this info with the rest of the team contrary to Mclaren..

I also think he just wants to stir some more ****..

 

So BMW could win the 2007 WCC...that would be a real hoot !

 

Not true since Mclaren did not appeal. Now it's a different matter altogether if BMW protests to the FIA. What a freaking mess!!

 

Curious that Coughlin didn't call that out when all this shook down in the first place...

 

Exactly. Mike Coughlan didn't mention this either in his amnesty letter to the FIA.

 

Stepney claims he DID share it with others at Ferrari:

Personally, I think this is Stepney stirring things up. Since he was apparantly trying to undermine Ferrari, I hardly believe he would be passing along information to make the team more competitive. I don't believe he actually received any information from McLaren.

If he did, then this is a big problem. As the FIA decision clearly states, using the information is not relevant. Merely possessing it is sufficent grounds for punishment. If Coughlan passed information to Stepney, then this is clearly a problem for Ferrari.

 

BMW, 2007 WCC!

 

a) Do you think he might have an nefarious purpose to say so?

b) Outstandingly fine logic. I really mean it. Indeed, only if he were a total psychopath - but then again...

c) By your own past logic, stated many times in support of McLaren, only if it can be probed that Ferrari used it somehow. Notice the actual chain of events up until FA stepped forward with the collaboration. Nothing happened.

I think that as far as Bernie and Max are concerned, this rotting corpse is to be considered buried until after the end of the season, just so they will not look like Inspector Clouseau & company.

 

First of all, I don't believe Stepney, he has been a complete liar from the start of this entire affair.

However, I was referring to the logic the FIA used in the second hearing. They revisited the issue of possession of proprietary information and revised the conclusions to state that utilization of the information was not necessary for punishment to be applied, posession alone was sufficient. This is a reversal of their findings following the first hearing. I disagree with their logic but the FIA did establish the precendent.

 

Well, there is not much consistent logic here at all, is there?

For example, how can they suggest that "utilization of information" was "not proven" when they had those setup-the-car e-mails?

As well as the precedent that under such circumstances, it is quite fair to fine a team 100m$, strip them of the championship, AND DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO ADJUST THE DRIVERS POINTS (drivers who drove these cars and set them up using the data).

I think that even the normally pro-McLaren David Hobbs said it right on that Speed preview last week - penalizing the "team" but not the "drivers" is complete nonsense. Of course, he did please his constituency by his statements that "Ferrari were the true cheaters here with the flex-floor" and the "100m$ was a ridiculous fine that might ruin McLaren financially".

He skipped the nuances that they had to change the wording of the rules to outlaw the floor, and that the $100m is not in fact that amount, but more like $30m after adjustment. Plus giving RD a loving soundbite to tell us how trustworthy he still is.

My take was that the Speed guys were really protesting the CC points and the fine by the reverse logic that since nothing was done to the drivers points, so then nothing should have happened to McL/M. Rather than the other way around.

 

I beg to differ.

In the first hearing RD said that Coughlan had the 780page dossier because he was going to take it with him to Honda.Mclaren did not know about them and they were not used. So they weren't punished for possesion.
They were punished in the second hearing once the emails surfaced which meant that the Ferrari information was used and dissiminated within the Mclaren organization.

 

I agree that I find the FIA's logic baffling and I also think the drivers should have been punished too.

However I think there were two reasons why they were not:

1) The drivers were promised amnesty if they came forward with any evidence.

2) Throwing the drivers out of the WDC would have caused significant economic losses to F1 (and Bernie, specifically). There is no way they would have let that happen.

 

I am going by the wording in the FIA's decision. They specifically altered their decision regarding the possession of the 780 page document. The only information that was shown to be disseminated by the emails was conversations between Stepney and Coughlan, not information drawn directly from the dossier. However the FIA changed their stance on possession of the dossier being sufficent reason to incur punishment, which is a complete reversal of their position in the first hearing.

I am not making a judgement call one way or the other on the FIA decision. I just wished they would be consistent in their logic, one way or the other.

 

FYI, the FIA can decide to convene a hearing sua sponte to investigate accusations of cheating by any team including those made by Stepney against Ferrari ...and after this new allegation, I do not see how the FIA cannot convene such an investigative hearing to determine the truth .

 

1) True. But two points come to light - wasn't FA coming forward anyway, for reasons of his own? Second, did RD or Hamilton come forward with anything at all, except to say "I know nothing"?

2) Obviously. Can you imagine the British fan reaction if that should have happened? Maybe this was the real reason for the amnesty thing and the driver immunity in the first place, no?

It all came down to the money, as one of our moderators pointed out weeks ago.

 

He's done in F1, might as well try and take Ferrari down with him at this point. I would be very surprised if anything he say's now is really the truth.

 

Working on a book "If I went both ways"...

 

MAMA MIA!!! Forget the rest of the 2007 Season, if this is true!

This is more interesting than anything I have seen in recent memory, on Masterpiece Theater's, "Inspector Morse," Mystery Series, that remains one of my favorites, after all these years.

If all this "sharing of information" amongst the teams is true, SUPER AGURI, may be the 2007 Worlds Constructor Champion!!!

It seems the "Fat Lady," hasn't begun to warm-up to sing, let alone the last ARIA. Stay tuned!

Who would have thought when I made the comment at the begining of all of this, "That the FISH, stinks from the head and not the tail," that whole bloody thing would turn into a "Fish Market!!!"

Ciao...Paolo

 

Who was it that said "I know where the bodies are buried"..

 

I was thinking the same thing, but I believe it is just Stepney grandstanding. Remember he lied through his teeth saying that he never passed any information etc.

Also I doubt the FIA has any great interest to reopen the case and go any further with it. They're happy to crown a new champion and move on.

 

Yes this is true how can anything he say now be credible.

Enough is enough I hope they move on..

 

+1

I think re-opening the case is going to result in a lot of disclosures coming out showing that this type of espionage goes on all the time in F1. We already have the Toyota team stealing Ferrari info and Renault stealing McLaren info. MotorSports magazine has an article about the number of previous incidents of teams stealing each other's info, including Ferrari. Harvey Postlethwaite was quoted as saying he once led a team of Ferrari engineers in breaking into the Williams garage to study their car back in the 1970s.

I have the feeling that the FIA and the sport would have been better served had this matter been handled privately between Ferrari, McLaren and the FIA. Disclosure after disclosure of teams cheating and stealing each others info just makes F1 look like yet another mickey-mouse organization. Nothing good for the sport comes of this.

 

this could well be true. ferrari has a long and well known history of "bending the rules" (aka cheating)
however Stepney has lost all and any credibility he ever had in the sport, so without proof all this will ever be is another unsubstianted rumour.

 

agreed