Why this vile cheat must be Kicked out

[Spencer]

Rock and a hard place Pete im afraid.

We didnt want to become a Chelsea type bought team - but it does seem that he is unwilling to inject to much cash into the spending of transfer fees.

If the Mittals were to take over, are we to assume that they are going to give Jim a transfer chest of say...20 / 30 mill to get into premier league...?You could argue that would bring us the rewards of more money for being in premeir league etc...In that case....What have Chelsea done wrong?(Apart from being a hated team)

[Funky]

Funny that - another former senior club employee said something entirely different - the only 100% fact is we'll never know the whole truth..

No problem Writtle, I'm not going to change your mind and would not expect to.

Lets just agree to disagree.

[paulmason]

Why agree to disagree, when clearly one of you are wrong ?

[Loneranger80]

any news on what time the announcement is due?

[Funky]

Why agree to disagree, when clearly one of you are wrong ?

Because I have one point of view and he has another.

If it's proved that I got it wrong and he is correct then I'm more than happy to say so.

I am pretty sure that the inital contact was made by GP they have been friends for a while before hand I think Gianni was even at Flavio's wedding.

But I also dont think there is a 100% way of proving either point so it's better just to leave it rather than a tit for tat style debate.

The most important thing was that Flavio got involved and got us out of a bit of a financial mess that none of the previous boards had managed to do.

It looks like today he may well be off anyway.

[Stanley]

Pete - Piquet may or may not have been in danger but who was to know what the consequences of his crash might have been? A wheel could have come off and gone God-knows-where for instance.

Correct. Pete does not mention the potential catastrophic consequences it could have caused to other drivers, when dealing with speeds of up to 200mph.

Two wrongs dont make a right.

[Funky]

Correct. Pete does not mention the potential catastrophic consequences it could have caused to other drivers, when dealing with speeds of up to 200mph.

Two wrongs dont make a right.

I still cant believe that Piquet agreed to it in the first place!

[Spencer]

A bit like the accident when a stray car part hit P.Massa and caused him to crash.That was just a accident - a piece of a car(Rubens i think) that came off his car and flew into Massa's head.Who knows what Piquets crash could have done.However - again im assuming that as soon as Piquet crashed, the race was yellow flagged and drivers would have been aware and approached with due care....

[Spencer]

Funky...a very good point.He agrred at the time in order to keep his drive.He only decided to come clean...once Renault sacked him...He obviously had no morales - just wanted the newspaper money.

[Quaz]

this thread cracks me up...if flavio wasn't at the club and the "cheating" story appeared in the news then 95% on here wouldn't have given a toss.But because he is at the club everyone wants him gone.....cheating in "all" sport happens but you get people saying this is the worst case in sporting history.......believe that if you are that naive.
If piquet was dumb enough to follow orders or suggestions then who really is completely at fault.

I cannot believe fans are arguing over something they have no say in what so ever......****** comical.

[Spencer]

I cannot believe fans are arguing over something they have no say in what so ever......****** comical

Quaz - i thought that was the point of a messagebaord for most people

[Quaz]

I cannot believe fans are arguing over something they have no say in what so ever......****** comical

Quaz - i thought that was the point of a messagebaord for most people

yeah maybe........but most can state an opinion and accept others....but some just don't want to debate just try and force their opinion........

[qblockpete]

If Piquet was in any REAL danger, he would not have done it.

He knew about it the day before (claims he didn't) and he should have told someone. His dad was gutted, that his son was a bad driver and never going to make it, so used Flavio as a scapegoat.

Funny how this only come to light after Flavio got rid of Piquet Jnr for ebing a ****e driver??

if he was challenging for the drivers championship, he would not have said a word.

[brightonr]

Thanks for a decent reply.

I think the difference is that Flavio (apparently) ordered his driver to crash. There is no proof that Schumi wanted to do it. Yes, I have seen the crash, but it comes down to proof. Show me someone who has said, "Yes. Schumi told me he was going to do this."

Pete - Piquet may or may not have been in danger but who was to know what the consequences of his crash might have been? A wheel could have come off and gone God-knows-where for instance.

Lastly, even if it is true that Flavio's face doesn't fit in F1 - then that still doesn't make what he did right.

David

David,

In my opinion, this is where part of the problem lies.

I don't know whether or not you listened to the link Pete put up, of the FIA hearing.

For those that did, it is quite clear, that at no point did FB order him to crash, indeed it was actually Piquet's suggestion. Now, I am not saying it was the correct thing to do to allow that to happen, clearly it was not.
There is a difference though, however tenuous, between ordering someone to do something and allowing something to happen.

You only had to listen to that hearing to know what a complete stitch up it was on so many levels. Putting aside Max Mosley's unorthodox tendencies in order to remain unbiased, surely he would not forget the name of a vital witness to such an important occurance. Piquet, although he claimed that he would have acted very differently had he given the matter some thought, still waited until he had lost his drive at Renault before admitting what had happened, even to the extent in ensuring that he had gained immunity from further action before doing so. How can it be acceptable that the person who had the idea, crashed the car and waited a long time before owning up, should be given immunity when others have not?

Whilst none of this actually absolves FB from his share of the blame, it does go some way to proving that the whole F1 circus, is indeed just that.

Whatever the outcome of todays meeting, I just hope that from now on, our owners (whoever they may be), place a little more emphasis on doing things in the correct manner with consideration given to all fans and that in return, they are allowed by those fans a little more time to continue the excellent progress being made on many issues, without being criticised from all angles as to how they run their business and spend their own money.

Sorry for going on a bit.

[davidla80]

If Piquet was in any REAL danger, he would not have done it.

He knew about it the day before (claims he didn't) and he should have told someone. His dad was gutted, that his son was a bad driver and never going to make it, so used Flavio as a scapegoat.

Funny how this only come to light after Flavio got rid of Piquet Jnr for ebing a ****e driver??

if he was challenging for the drivers championship, he would not have said a word.

Pete - but what about the possible danger to others?
And people can argue that Piquet is partly to blame but that doesn't excuse Flavio for telling him to do it.

David