Did Piquet crash on purpose? (Poll)

Posted on

| Written by

Nelson Piquet Jnr's crash helped Fernando Alonso win in Singapore

After the Singapore Grand Prix last year there were some people who asked if Nelson Piquet Jnr crashed deliberately but many others – myself included – who rubbished the idea.

But the FIA believes it is worth investigating and has launched a World Motor Sports Council hearing into the affair. So how many people believe Renault are guilty?

Do you believe Nelson Piquet Jnr was told to crash by Renault?

  • Don't know (21%)
  • No (40%)
  • Yes (39%)

Total Voters: 3,343

 Loading ...

I didn’t believe the claims about Piquet straight after the race because they just seemed too incredible. But it’s hard to imagine a WMSC hearing being called without some evidence being presented.

I would be very surprised if this evidence hasn’t come from the Piquet camp. As F1 Fanatic reader Paolo Verri pointed out to me in an email recently, Piquet hinted at strange goings-on when he blasted Briatore after being dorpped by Renault:

The conditions I have had to deal with during the last two years have been very strange to say the least – there are incidents that I can hardly believe occurred myself.

Renault has said it will not comment on the matter before the hearing on September 21st. It wouldn’t be a surprise if bits of information started to appear in the Brazilian press between now and then.

Until we see some evidence it’s still too much for me to believe (a) that Renault would do something like this, (b) they left some kind of incriminating evidence and (c) Piquet was able to crash an F1 car on purpose more convincingly than Michael Schumacher did at Monte-Carlo in 2006.

That’s my take. What’s yours?

Who was involved? Did Fernando Alonso know? And what do we make of Piquet spinning on the warm-up lap before the race?

The Renault Singapore controversy

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

208 comments on “Did Piquet crash on purpose? (Poll)”

  1. I’m wondering why wasn’t Piquet asked to crash at the tortoise.Even Kimi crashed out there. At least he would have had a reason to convince people questioning his abilities. The approach to the start-finish line is not a place to crash at all. The fact that he spun at the same place during the formation lap shows he was up to something. Knowing Flavio & Alonso i’m sure they did conspire.

    1. thats a critical point in this investiaagtion and should give a clear lead to the fuel load predictions by renault strategists. they will be answering a lot of questions here

    2. It is not the same place.

    3. This is an interesting question: if you’re told to crash to bring out a safety car, how do you do it?

      You wouldn’t want to put the front of the car into the barrier because of the risk of something coming up and hitting you in the head.

      But you would need to make enough of a mess to bring out the safety car. So you’re going to have to take a wheel off so they have to crane the car out of the way.

      And you’re going to have to do it where the car can’t be pulled out of the way easily, forcing them to use the safety car.

      Looking at Piquet’s crash, the angle of impact, extent of the damage, and the part of the track where it happened all point to a deliberate crash executed correctly.

      But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t an accident. Piquet set his fastest lap of the race on the lap before he crashed. Perhaps he was just getting into the groove and pushed a bit too hard?

      1. Couldn’t he have just stalled the engine in the middle of the tortoise? Its a dangerous place. There is no way they could have towed the car if it was stalled.

        1. How could he have done that without it looking really suspicious, though?

          1. Keith,

            This seems a bit far fetched. Besides the how. What driver in there right mind crashes a car on purpose.

        2. he didnt spin at the same place.

      2. Max should resign now!!!
        5th September 2009, 11:28

        Well this was in the forum:


        Well let me tell you a story…………

        Earlier this year I went to watch the Chinese GP. Being an intrepid Brit traveler and always keen to sample local cuisine, I decided to visit a famous Indian curry house in Shanghai.

        Unbeknown to me this restaurant is a favorite haunt for all the F1 teams and GP personnel which is apparent from all the GP paraphernalia donated by the teams and on display in the ground floor bar.

        Anyway, being a Nobby Nomates I was tucked away in a corner all by myself to enjoy my Balti! That night a day or so before practice started it was quiet apart from another table of 4 who where obviously engaged on GP business, I suspect electronics or communications of some sort and from their conversation they accompanied the circus around the globe.

        It was impossible not to overhear some of there conversation which covered many aspects of the GP’s but in the conversation was a casual remark that suggested

        Piquet junior only retained his drive for 2009 because he had crashed to order in Singapore! This was not the main source of the chat and was accepted by all without question as fact and as as part of the wider conversation.

        Now I would not put anything past the Flav especially after seeing him in his thong! but I think this time he might have gone too far!

        Posted 14 hours ago #

        1. Max should resign now!!!
          5th September 2009, 11:31

          Damn this bit was supposed to go like this.

          Piquet junior only retained his drive for 2009 because he had crashed to order in Singapore! This was not the main source of the chat and was accepted by all without question as fact and as as part of the wider conversation.

      3. If the allegations are coming from Piquet, then perhaps the FIA could invite Renault to bring a spare car to Singapore and ask Nelson to re-enact his spin…

        1. lol that’s exactly what they should do

      4. lewisisoverated
        5th September 2009, 12:53

        yeah that is so true.. i was seated not 10 meters form where the accident took place.. it looked very suspicious the way it happened.. he randomly lost the rear wheels and the rear end of the car (if i remember right) slammed into the barriers.

      5. Hi people,
        this afternoon I took the DVD review of last season to watch the facts again. It seems to me that Piquet did not crash “directly”, but he had a spin, and then crashed. If I were him, I would have crashed my car on the side, taking a corner too wid I mean. But absolutely without a spin, because you never know what could happen to you.
        Anyway, FIA do not call for the World Council when they not have evidences. Let’s see what they say and let’s wait to see these evidences we too.

        1. I agree completely. He would be putting too much to chance with a deliberate spin. He could have either ruined his car or spun harmlessly to a halt. Running wide would be the most effective way to damage his car enough to bring out the SC and it wouldn’t be suspicious at all. It also would have put his car on the racing line, making a safety car all the more likely. Think about how many drivers got caught out by running wide at the Wall of Champions in Montreal.

          I don’t buy the rumors and I think this is just a case of Nelson being a bad loser.

          1. Yes, the wall at the Canadian GP is the best example. It is what I mead when I say “taking a corner too wide” :-)
            Thanks for the tip

      6. What about the other four safety cars that came out in that race and left Fernando trailing 3 laps behind? You will tell me that did not happen but that would have required 20/20 hindsight. A dreadful race on a circuit nearly as nasty as Valencia.

    4. Ben Ell is right. He spun at different places.

      On the warm up lap, it was the approach to start-finish, near the pit lane entrance.

      But in the race, it was the exit from Turn 17 in front of the Bay Grandstand.

      I still don’t think any driver is willing to crash a car on purpose.

    5. You know Flav and Alonso???? Really??
      Thats really cool!!! Could you please introduce some of us to them as well?? :P

    6. Personally after watching the clip repeeatedly, I think it’s just Piquet and his sout grapes stirring up trouble. Have you ever watched David Coultard crash as he came into the pit lane, at low speed? and did anyone question that. Nope, this again is F1 politics.

  2. Well, I don’t think he crashed on purpose. He would have crashed anyway :D

    1. Maybe he’s more skilled than we gave him credit for. :)

    2. lol! yes, we are talking about Piquet here its more of a When rather than why

  3. From my viewpoint Renault and all key persons involved in this crime: Briatore, Symonds, Alonso and Piquet should be banned from F1 forever.

    1. If it turns out to be true, I agree.

    2. I bet you are a McLiar-fan as well..

      1. Max should resign now!!!
        5th September 2009, 12:23

        I bet you’re a Scuderia Cosa Nostra fan. :)

        1. El nano are you spanish?

  4. If this kind of “corruption” and “fixing” is being dug back up, bring back up that race in Brazil with Glock slowing down on the last straight and allowing his buddy Hamilton past. come on FIA you know he had no reason to slow down at the last corner it wasn’t even wet.

    1. Trulli and Glock’s times were identical on the final lap, both were on the same tyres and rain was starting to bucket down.

      I’m an avid Ferrari fan, but I even I can say that Lewis did that on his own skill and merit.

    2. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

    3. That horse is well dead, and is an insult to Glock to keep raising it, in comparism he run his last lap fairly well considering.

    4. Haha, well funny if you’re being serious.

    5. Sorry but why would Glock have stayed out to get ahead of Lewis in the first place if this conspiracy was true. Ridiculous.

    6. In fact if I remember correctly Glock was a couple of seconds faster than Trulli on the same tyre on the same lap.

    7. Bringing up the Glock thing is a bit of a joke now. Those who can’t see that him staying out on wet weather tyres worked for him – because he made a net gain of one position – have a pretty poor grasp of motor racing.

      1. If he stayed out on wet weather tyres then I have even more respect for him, given most of the race was dry! lol.

    8. Marc, you people need to ACCEPT the obvious. can’t believe people like you aren’t over it yet!

      1. People who bring up the lewis-Glock issue now are really mad.

  5. I voted no… I would like to think that even if his future was at stake, Piquet would not have followed team orders to do this.

    On the other hand, I was hoping for a “I wouldnt be suprised…” option when voting =P

    1. I voted no… I would like to think that even if his future was at stake, Piquet would not have followed team orders to do this.

      What makes you think that? Piquet always knew that he was useless,talentless. Anyway he has the backing of his rich father, he could always fallback on that.

      1. Lewis had to fight till the last race in GP2 to win the title against him in a better car though….

  6. (c) Piquet was able to crash an F1 car on purpose more convincingly than Michael Schumacher did at Monte-Carlo in 2006.

    I do like this point.

    1. That’s really unfair. You have no right to say that Schumacher crashed in Monaco 2006…..he merely “parked” his car. Big difference between the two.

      1. Well, he had to race in the car the next day – that’s why he didn’t feel like bashing it :)

      2. same outcome sykes, different method.

    2. Schumacher didn’t need to bring out the safety car, yellow lags were sufficient.

      1. flags even… ;)

    3. Ending qualifying slightly early to fix the positions isn’t even close to messing up the entire race to improve your position.

      Penalties for qualifying infringements are incomparable to race penalties.

      1. Alonso should know… He’s already rigged a qualifying session after all! ;) I’m sure Raikkonen is grateful though. :P

  7. Max should resign now!!!
    5th September 2009, 11:19

    If Joe Saward doesn’t think it’s nonsense then a solid YES.

  8. If you just consider the crash video, it looks like he guns the throttle on the exit to spin the car.

    Now, we know Nelson was really rubbish, but this is a mistake that is so fundamental even he wouldn’t do it by accident.

    Then you have the fact that Nelson got the drive at Renault this year when there were many others (some managed by Briatore) that could have filled the seat more capably and not troubled Alonso, and now PK is fired, these allegations come out?

    He has to have done it on purpose. Max must be rubbing his hands with glee – he has been waiting 15 years for revenge against Briatore who wrote a letter of no-confidence in his FIA leadership…

    1. Max must be rubbing his hands with glee – he has been waiting 15 years for revenge against Briatore who wrote a letter of no-confidence in his FIA leadership…

      I think James Allen wrote something similar to that on his blog. What I don’t get is, if Mosley has this vendetta against Briatore, why did he pass up a golden opportunity to punish Renault in the spying case at the end of 2007?

      1. I already wrote this in the other post but I’ll write it again.

        Because they’re afraid that Renault would leave F1 for good if a hefty fine is imposed on them.

        There’s no danger of that happening with McLaren, hence the $100 million fine.

        Perhaps McLaren should threaten to quit the next tie they’re hauled up for something.

        1. I agree – Max has a Vendetta against Flav but is in love with the manufacturers – ironic considering his team was the lowest form of garagiste!

        2. Well, Mercedes did last time.
          An threatened to pull brawn’s engines.
          Look back to Haug’s comments pre liegate hearings.

        3. Renault doesnt exactly need F1 to exist. That is not the case for Mclaren, so their’s wouldn’t be a credible threat and it would only make things worse for them.

      2. Or indeed seriously punish Benetton in 1994 after the team had tampered with their fuel rigs – an incident that was even more dangerous than Piquet’s crash. Instead Mosley met with the team’s QC the night before the WMSC meeting and suggested if the team pleaded guilty and blamed it on a junior employee (which the evidence didn’t support) then there’d be no punishment.

        1. You’re making that up. They claimed there wasn’t a problem with removing the filter and IIRC they even had permission for it.

          1. They lied when they said they had permission.
            Try reading this, this and this

  9. Of course he wasn’t. Piquet Is just biter from Renault sacking him. He is a rubbish driver and is just trying to cover up his useless races with an excuse.

    1. He may be a rubbish driver, and we all know by now that he is perfectly capable of crashing without being asked by his team, but it just seems like there is something to this story. Also, Piquet admitted after the accident it was his fault so he’s already taken the damage to his reputation.

      Piquet may get his revenge on Briatore/ Renault by initiating this, but he’s ruining his career- what credibility does he have left now?

    2. Glock gave massa a chance to win do you not realise that!, if glock had pitted for intermediates he would have been behind hamilton anyway. dont you know you have to be on the right tyre at the right time?

  10. the sad thing, that we won’t know the truth.
    and maybe this whole story wouldn’t have been revealed if Piquet would still drive for Renault.

    so my point of view: check the telemetry and radio transfers, and make a decision. we don’t have access to any of them, so we won’t know, we have to trust the fia.

    i have mixed feelings about that
    – if it is true, than it’s nothing worse than Austria 2002, just a simple team-order, with some financial loss added by crashing a car.
    – it wouldn’t be the first time for Briatore (remember 1994-95? every second race benetton were investigated by breaking the rules somehow, with Briatore and Schumacher) and for Alonso (mclaren-gate 2007)
    – i don’t think that Alonso would ask for anything like this as his season was off or would have agreed anything like this (however, i’m not sure that Schumacher was asked about wheter he would like to pass Barrichello…)

    i just can hope, that this is some kind of revenge of a frustrated and laid down former driver…

    1. – if it is true, than it’s nothing worse than Austria 2002, just a simple team-order, with some financial loss added by crashing a car.

      It’s much worse than that.

      Austria 2002 was just unsporting behaviour. Barrichello wasn’t asked to become a crash test dummy so that Schumacher could get 10 points.

      1. yes, he was just humiliated a bit…

        the main reason the media picked up this case (except for the daily scandal dose for tabloids) is the damage this kind of behaviour could cause to the betting industry.

        if you’re a real driver, it doesn’t matter if you have to just simply pull over or crash the car, and he “did” it in the safest way in a safe car on a safe track, if he was asked to do it.

        of course there is difference, because the risk is never 0%, as we seen in the case of Massa, and this fact might make it an irresponsible decision, but considering the aspects of the sport, the fair play, it’s totally the same

      2. The reason why it would be much worse, is that crashing endangers others (drivers and spectators) not just those within the team.

        This is also why it would be much worse than Austria ’02.

        1. see your point of course

          1. Have to agree entirely with John H. Add to the point that Piquet’s crash changed the whole race and the qualification position of all the drivers and teams on the field. Alonso was never going to win it, never. The Austrian switch, bad as it was only changed the order of the 2 team”mates” involved. In many ways Ferrari has done it again more smoothly in Brazil 07 with nice pit stop set up and China 08(still abit too obvious there).

  11. I think that Piquets intention was to push the car out wide and have a minor side impact, stall it and then get the safety car out, what happened in my opinion, is that he gave it too much and bought the back round, causing a much bigger impact than was planned. Piquet couldn’t even crash properly!!!
    I also believe that there must be telemetry data that points to something, this is the smoking gun. He would have to have done something different for the incident to occur, if he has detailed that to th FIA, and the data confirms it, then its case closed.
    I didn’t believe this when the conspiracy arose last year, in fact I was very doubtful until the FIA announced the extraordinary meeting, but although most people are concentrating on thinking the radio transmissions hold the clue, there is a lot of live car data collected through a race, so it must be fairly easy to prove.
    As for punishments, all involved should serve a ban, not so sure about a life ban but certainly 2-3 years with a huge fine imposed, for me this is far worse than spygate, so 100million euros would not be out of the question.

  12. until there is a decision made by the powers that be, i find it hard to believe that renault would do something like this. Flavio doing something dodgy, yeah i can see that. Crashing an F1 car in the manner that piquet did, you could try to do replicate that 100 times and it not work out. It just seems to far fetched for me. Why would Flavio ask his driver to do something like that knowing that a)it could cause injury to his driver (which would then possibly mean replacing him if the injury was severe enough) b) the subsequent cost and pain in the *ss it would cause the team to fix the car. The utter stupidity of asking something like this. As i said it wouldn’t surprise me to ehar flavio doing something unsporting but to ask a driver to crash his car, no way.

    If i’m proved wrong then i’ll eat my socks…although i might add a little soy sauce some bok choi and roasted garlic…just to help it go down a little easier. =)

    and just quickly 2 more points why would piquet Agree to do something like this? If he in fact did i can’t imagine his dad would be too pleased and would more than likely have quite a bit to say about it.

    1. It wasn’t a very high speed crash so there wasn’t much risk in Piquet being injured.(Not that it justifies anything)

      The subsequent cost to fix the car would be peanuts compared to the money that Renault would get for winning 10 points.

      They could have also done it because Alonso might have had a clause in his contract that allows him to leave Renault at the end of 2008 if they do not win a single race.

      Piquet probably agreed to do it in exchange for a racing seat in 2009. He obviously couldn’t earn it on driving skill alone.

      1. Alonso had a clause in his contract last year saying if they didn’t come 3rd in the constructors then he could leave. By Singapore Renault could never have beaten BMW to third, so there would have been no point in engineering a win.

        Alonso stayed in the end due to the massive improvement in performence by Renault toward the end of ’08 and the umpredictaility of who would be quick in ’09.

      2. It was so early in the race that it was far from certain that Alonso would go on to collect the ten points, let alone finish the race himself.

        1. It worked for Piquet in Germany. Why wouldn’t it work for Alonso on a track where overtaking him back is virtually impossible?

      3. Sykes, surely you can’t defend Renault for asking one of their drivers to deliberately crash a car (assuming they are guilty)? The risk of the driver/ marshals/ spectators being injured may have been small, but the needless risk is still there.

        In a sport which has suffered as many fatalities as F1, asking a driver to crash deliberately seems quite disrespectful. Regardless of how small the crash may have been, I’m completely against it on principle.

        1. It wasn’t a very high speed crash so there wasn’t much risk in Piquet being injured.(Not that it justifies anything)

          I never said that it was justified, merely that it could be a possible reason for Renault doing what they did.

  13. i dont think he had crashed on purpose he’s just a lame driver (testing new avatar) :P

    1. Looking good! :-)

  14. When this story first appeared, I was sceptical, thinking it was just Nelson trying to cause trouble for Flavio. Now, having read a lot of articles, and see that Quest probably started their investigation before the Spa w/end, and there is now to be a hearing on the 21st, I don’t see how we can avoid the probability that this incident was planned.

  15. As posted previously here and elsewhere, I always believed this was done on purpose. For me the interesting thing will be to find out what evidence the FIA has managed to unearth, and who within the team was involved.

  16. I don’t think the FIA would even call for such a hearing unless they already have some proof. And if the FIA have already decided that Renault are guilty then no fancy lawyer can save them.
    Even if Renault are innocent it won’t matter in the FIA’s kangaroo court of law.

    What will most likely happen is that Flav will step down ala Ron Dennis and Renault will be found not guilty. Mosley gets his revenge against FOTA once more.

  17. Just to lighten up the discussion a bit, I wonder what the radio communication was?
    Maybe sth like this?

    Race Engineer: Nelson how are your tyres
    Piquet: Slight graining on fronts, but ok. Car feels very good. I can push for position.
    Briatore: She sells seashells
    Piquet: By the seashore?
    Briatore: The shells she sells are surely seashells.
    Piquet: Oh **** I’ve lost it.
    Briatore: Never mind is bad luck

    Copied from another forum ;)
    Ofc, there are some who say McLaren did the same thing when Hamilton crashed Kimi in the pit lane: ;)

    1. err, here’s the mclaren incident: click!

  18. (c) Piquet was able to crash an F1 car on purpose more convincingly than Michael Schumacher did at Monte-Carlo in 2006.

    C’mon, Piquet crashed and spun more than any other driver last season.It would be extremely easy for him to do it.
    Also, I feel there is also another important point to be seen. Why would Renault be desperate to do something like this? After all, they were able to be consistent since then(atleast Alonso was).I still think it is unlikely that Renault would risk this just for a win which would have no impact at all for either of the championships. The FIA should find the motive for this if it is true.

  19. I find this whole affair very interesting, even if it does ‘bring the sport into disrepute’. The main questions which grab me are, 1) what real evidence does the FIA have which warrants such investigation, an allegation is one thing but I can’t imagine them going on just that, and 2) What does Piquet hope to gain? Obviously, to stick the boot in, but I can’t see it helping his long term F1 career, even if his allegations are founded.

  20. Could the Renault personnel be booked under Singaporean law for :-

    1) Risking the safety of own driver & others in the vicinity, including the other drivers, marshalls spectators.

    2) Nelson Piquet Jr for crashing deliberately, endangering his own life, which can be treated as ‘Attempt To Suicide”

    1. no because it happened in a controlled environment.
      if a football player breaks someone’s leg in a dirty tackle is that attempted murder? nope.

  21. Can people forget so quickly? Piquet Jnr was ruuubbbiisssh…

    This was a man that we all got up to sing “he spins right round baby right round” every GP to his mishap

  22. Keith – what about the predictions championship? It’s saturday and we still don’t have the results for Belgium:)

    1. Don’t worry mate. You are still the lead :) :)

      But your recent slump is comparable to Button :)


  23. I wanted to vote “I couldn’t possibly comment”.

    Is there still a suspended ban hanging over Renault after the wheel came off in Hungary? If so, could it affect (or be adapted by the FIA to affect) the severity of any punishment for Piquet’s crash?

    1. No suspended ban – they just got a reprimand and a fine.

  24. Piquet’s warm-up lap incident looked more like a donut than a spin. I didn’t see any attempt on his part to correct `a spin’. That said, it’s got to be the easiest thing in world to allow a car to drive just a bit wide on a corner and have the rear wheels contact the wall—which is what appears to have happened. I voted a DEFINITE YES that he crashed the car on purpose . . . or that something was done to the car to make it do so.

    1. Yeah, it looks more like he went little wide, hit the wall and then overcorrected and spun into the opposite wall.

      If it was on purpose I’d guess he tried to put a rear wheel in the wall rather than a front wheel and risk injury. It then went horribly wrong and he lost the car totalling it across the track in the other wall.

  25. As insane as it sounds, I think he may well have crashed intentionally.

  26. Talk about split opinions.
    3.00pm Saturday
    785 Votes casted 39% say YES, 39% say NO, 22% say Don’t Know.

    Very interesting.

    1. Still the same!

      After almost double (1365) amount of votes at 21:11…

      interesting indeed!

    2. 721 Yes / 721 No
      This has to be the closest poll yet.

  27. ABOUT EVIDENCES: When Reginaldo Leme told about Renault case on TV last Sunday, there was something that was lost in translation and in all this mess: The man said that FIA ALREADY collected strong testimonies from Renault´s engineers that incriminates Flavio Briatore.

    Because of that, the mood inside the team is like a witch hunt…

    So, I don’t think that FIA will conduct their investigations backed only in telemetry data. Could be have another people (supposing that was our Piquetzinho the main source!) inside the team that opened its mouth…

    1. Does this indicate that perhaps the FIA were looking to brush this under the carpet and give it very low level media. But it is being reported that the initial source was Nelsons “People”!

  28. The irony is that Alonso won Fuji also. With a heap of luck but without any apparent skulduggery. So his contract clause was probably fixed up there ensuring his return for this year.

    I’m not sure I believe a driver would do this. But Whatever happened Piquet will NEVER admit to such a thing— if he ever wants to drive so much as a tuk tuk again. If he does he’ll have to testify that he reasonably believed Flavio had his girlfriend tied up in a basement somewhere. Whatever the data say, he’s the one with his foot on the pedal so he can just deny everything or offer other explanations. Or he can say he didn’t know where Alonso was (didn’t ask, wasnt told). He’s already said the car was so heavy it was bottoming on straights and wouldnt even go in a straight line. It will be hard to bring down the full ton of bricks on Renault without a complete conspiracy.

    1. Alonso won Fuji because of Hamiltons Kamikaze bomb at the first corner.

    2. I totally agree. I have no idea whether or not this conspiracy is true but I never got why everybody was so quick to pick Piquet, at least Junior, as the undisputed spreader of the rumour. It’s career suicide and he’s said numerous times he’s still looking for a drive.

      On the other hand I can see why he could have done it, people have done far crazier and far more dangerous stuff for much less gain. We’ll see what the FIA comes up with the 21st. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were true, like many the thought crossed my mind more than once during the signapore grand prix.

  29. Someone said to me soon after Nelsinho got the boot from Flav that Flav shouldn’t upset the Piquets…

    I initially thought that was a little odd as Piquet Senior didn’t appear to have the pull in the paddock that Flav has but now I wonder… not necessarily about the pull with the FIA but about Daddy Piquet not being a man to cross…

    (And as to Junior being a rubbish driver that is a little wide of the mark… he wasn’t the top of the tops but I bet he’d do pretty well in most other formulae… indeed he had a couple of days where he out-performed Alfonso who is rated as being pretty decent…. and he did that whilst being treated as a second class citizen in the team….)

    1. Your right Lady Snowcat, we all love to joke about young Nelson but like you say in any other class he would do well, he seemed to have issues concentrating over race distance but he always seemed to have good single lap speed. And poor old Luca has shown us what a driver who is really off the pace looks like :).

      1. he always seemed to have good single lap speed

        Except in qualifying where it actually mattered …

        1. LOL :)

  30. Going to shut down all the big heads in F1. Ron and Now Flavio. who can face Max now?

  31. There is some precedent here, but in another formula. Back in 2004 Dale Earnhardt Jr. intentionally spun (but didn’t hit anything) in a NASCAR race in Bristol in order to bring out a safety car so he wouldn’t go a lap down. He was fined $10,000 and lost 25 points. (Although in NASCAR 25 points are nothing.)

    1. Good spot. Although I wouldn’t besmirch the good name of F1 by describing Nascar as a “formula”…

  32. Delibrate or Not Delibrate one thing is sure. The FIA would rule in favor of Renault on Sep 21st. With the departures of Honda and BMW from the sport they cannot afford to aggravate another major manufacturer who is already considering an exit from the sport.

    Again F1 is the most complicated sport and it is not as simple as it looks on the TV. There are big guns and a lots of money involved. This is more than racing and I would’nt be surprised if these kind of things are happening regularly in different places in the sport either going unnoticed or pretending to be unnoticed.

    Somehow I am getting a feeling…It is just my personal opinion that FIA is trying to act as if they are very serious about it and in that way if they rule Renault not guilty it will look all the more cleaner.

    And the Piquet’s are not foolish to jeopardize their career in this sport when it is evident that if Renault is found guilty, Piquet has an equal share in the crime and will be met with a severe punishment.

  33. My question: What is the evidence?
    The direct and most compelling evidence would come from the driver. Much like when the FIA granted immunity to Alonso for his testimony during Spygate, I’m sure they have cut the same deal with Piquet Jr in exchange for his testimony.

    It just may come down to Piquet’s word against Flabio’s.
    What other evidence could exist, besides other team personnel?

    As for sanctions against Renault if found guilty, they may overlook the Renault team and sanction the team principal for allowing or creating this incident. Banish the leader, with a nominal fine for team.

    Sounds fair to me, IF found guilty.

    1. I would say that Renault the engine mfg is innocent if this affair comes to fruit. But the principles of the team..flavio, pat symonds and a few other should be banned from the sport for life.
      If this is true then the fia has to come down hard on the players and I mean all the players like they did with mclaren.
      If F1 cannot police itself better of people who will go to any extent to win we will end up with formula cosworth and max will win anyway.

  34. I find it surprising that some people think it unlikely that the Renault F1 team would cheat. The two big forces in the Renault team are Alonso and Flav. Both of these men are never far away from controversy and alleged (and often proven) impropriety of some sort. In that sense, Alonso is the natural successor to Schumi. Alonso has been associated with pretty much every allegation of cheating or impropriety over the last few years. And who can forget Flav’s reign at Benetton: when illegal launch and traction control systems were found on the Benetton onboard computers. Flav’s and Benetton’s insistence that the systems were too complicated to remove (when Williams and others had removed their systems in an afternoon) and that, although they were present, they hadn’t been used (!? Recall, e.g, the French GP of ’94) will convince few people. And I haven’t forgotten the illegal fuel rig that Benetton used, either!

    If found guilty, Renault, Piquet, Alonso, and any other key figure, should be banned from F1 for ten years.

    1. Joaqo (Max should resign now!!!)
      7th September 2009, 4:02

      Amen brotha!

  35. I voted YES, but I don’t think Renault is guilty other than put a man such as Flavio commanding their Formula One Team, but if it’s true, they will pay as well as Flavio – no more team managemente in F1 and both drivers, because NOBODY will make me believe that it was something that was never discused with Fernando… Keep dreaming. The call to do it right there my have been Flavio, but Alonso and Piquet already knew the plan. From Flavio it’s some I personally would expected, even with everybody was saying Denis was the big bad wolf in F1… I already knew there were other mush worst like Flavio and the mob at Ferrari… So, for a change, lost hope FIA does the right thing, and bans Renault (the lesser guilty – I’m sure the CEO fom Renault was not included in Flavio’s plans), Flavio (goodbye and don’t come back), Piquet (never will we forget the great driver his father was in F1) and Mr. Alonso (that already has been saved from other affairs that he was involved and other were punish – let’s see if FIA has the same guts shown when then were (are) after Hamilton….)

  36. I voted ‘no’. If a team is daft enough to do this then there has to be a good enough motive, doesn’t there? What serious gain was there for Renault by doing this? Alonso wasn’t in the the hunt for the WDC title. Renault weren’t in the hunt for the Constructors title.

    If this story is true then I’m sure that Flav would have treated Piquet a little bit better this season and not dump him, but I don’t think that Flav would put himself in this situation in the first place.

    I don’t think that Piquet has the skill to crash or lose control of his car on demand. Also, would Piquet jeopardise his racing career in some kind of vengeance over Renault as this would imply he was implicit in this?

    Perhaps the spanish Mafia’s involved. They put a ton of money on Alonso and then leant on Flav to come up with the goods. lol

  37. how would piquet know when to crash????

    am i missing something but the comms between the driver and pitwall would have been listened over by the powers that be at the time very much like melb this year (which i know is diffrent but used as an example!!)

    1. The whole idea is that it was premeditated. With Alonso’s early stop included. They could have agreed on a code sentence. Like: “Piquet we want you to push” or “Alonso just pitted”

    2. If it was pre-arranged then Renault would have known when Alonso was coming in and could have told Piquet in advance what lap to crash on – providing there was no safety car period to begin with.

      A more likely scenario is that they could have agreed some innocent-sounding key word or phrase before the race – something as simple as them giving him the information that Alonso had pitted – which Piquet was to take as his cue.

      You’re quite right, it not as if they’d have gotten on the radio during the race and said “Oh by the way Nelson, we’d like you to stick it in the barrier now…”

      1. have we got the comms??? that would make it all a bit clearer…..would Nelson Jnr have made such a statement in his claim??like “alonso has pitted” as his Q for the crash…..it would support his account far more….

  38. I voted that I didn’t know.

    And it’s not as if anyone else on this site can answer anything other than that.

  39. How much did Renault pay Hamilton to run everyone wide at turn 1 in Fuji, allowing Alonso through to win the race? :D

      1. Keith! how do i put a picture beside my name?

        help me out i cant figure it out

        1. Just follow the instructions in this link

          1. You rock Mclaren Project 4!

  40. any one here play GRID? I wonder why Nelson Piguet is the one who always crashes on the first lap in the end-of-season Leemans 24hours?

  41. If this incident is found to be true, wouldn’t Piquet Jr has some punishment? He certanintly put at risk not only his life (I know controlled eviroment…) but other drivers lives. In court If I ask you to robber a bank and you do it, aren’t you guilty of robbery? Anyone can answer this questions? Thanks fanatics.

    1. HounslowBusGarage
      5th September 2009, 23:15

      What kind of punishment would that be?
      Loss of all points scored in the 2009 season?
      He scored points in 2008 Germany and is still eligible for a seat in 2010, so for a punishment to be actually felt by Piquet Jr it would need to be removal of points on 2008 and 2009, plus removal of superlicense for 2010.

      1. If there is a provision under Singaporean law,Piquet could possibly be booked for:-

        Crashing deliberately, endangering his own life, which can be treated as ‘Attempt To Suicide”

      2. Yep, i agree with you bus. Merely stripping him of the points he scored in 08 & 09 wouldn’t possibly teach him a lesson. That kind of punishment is useless as we’ve seen it with cheating schumi. He was stripped of all his points in 97, but he continued to cheat until his very last season in 06.

        Very long ago a journalist once asked Piquet Sr as to why he punched Eliseo Salazar in the 1982 German gp. Piquet sr replied by saying ” So that he(Salazar) learns”

        Piquet Sr being a ‘good’ father must punch his son straight in the face so that he lears not to “lie” when he fails ;)

  42. Would`nt Massa have won anyway, but for the pit lane cock up ? did Flav have control of Ferrari`s traffic light system too ?

  43. it says in the times that Piquet was asking what lap he was on in the laps leading up to the crash. now i can understand a driver near the end of the monaco grand prix asking what lap he was on but i can’t understand a driver asking this question less that 10 laps into a race where his own pit stop was not till the mid way point of the race.

  44. Night before Race.

    Flavio-” Crash at Turn 17, Lap 13 ”

    Piq Jnr-” OK ”

    Remember, the secret to cheating at Poker is not to deal yourself a Royal Flush, but a succesion of Kings and Aces.

    1. Sorry, should of been `The exit of turn 17, as there are no cranes their to allow quick clearance of YOUR Car`.

    2. Formation Lap. Nelsinho spins. Radio transmission recorded (and currently available to Quest):

      FB: “Damm God! Nelsinho, I told you: Turn 17, Lap 13, not Turn 13, Lap 17!”

      NP(Jr): “Ok, Ok, Turn 17… Lap 13… err… including formation lap, or not?

      FB: “Pay attention Nelsinho, when the moment arrive, I will tell you:The Dogs barks”

      NP(Jr): “Ok, Ok. I will wait until a barking dog cross the track.”

      FB: “Forget about Barking Dogs, Nelsinho, when the moment arrives I will tell you: Just do it”

      NP(Jr): “Ok, Ok. Err… So I will have to do it in turn 17 or when you tell me Just do it?”

      FB: “Forget it, Nelsinho, cancel everything, cancel everything. Just drive and push as mach as you can”

      NP(Jr): “Ok, Ok. I will do my best, as in every race.”

      FB:”Thanks, Nelsinho. Push, push, push!”

  45. I voted no because:
    a) I do not believe ANYONE would risk an injure or worse by deliberately crashing an F1 car at top speed
    b) there was no warranty of SC
    c) even with SC, there was no warranty that FA would win d) the way things ended with his boss suggest that PIQ is just seeking revenge
    e) knowing PIQ skills is hard to belive that he managed to do that on pourpose lol

  46. I don’t know….looks like the opinions are running about 50/50. I know that if it’s real it’s a bad thing, needs to be investigated and a verdict reached. If Renault were to be found guilty, what then? Fire Flavio and all or most of the engineering staff? OR throw Renault out of the WC? (1 less team….a manufacturer) Personnely I don’t think it was premeditated or contrived. Maybe I’m looking at it with rose coloured glasses.
    Bottom line is this…I think the kid, (Piquet Jr.) is too dumb to make something like this work. The fact that Massa approached Flav right after the race and accused him of this means nothing to me. Chaulk it up to a hot headed Brazilian in the heat of the moment. I think maybe Piquet Jr. or Sr. was so upset about Jr. getting canned that they shot their mouth off about something that didn’t happen and now it’s too late to back track.

  47. Gerdoner,

    That blew my 2 World Champs in one corner(come to think about it,they weren`t in a corner?), but Kimi weren`t quite the same afterwards…( Now there`s a conspiracy :-)

  48. I voted “I don’t know”, because I think Renault (or rather Briatore) quite capable of asking him to, but I’m not convinced any driver would actually do it. It’s one thing to take a dive in boxing, but purposely crashing your car on a street circuit? I mean, keeping your drive is important to F1 drivers of course, but you have to be, you know, alive and whole to drive.

  49. wong chin kong
    6th September 2009, 2:42

    I watched the video many times on Piquet Jr spinning on his warm up lap at a corner. Everybody took the corner slowly without incident yet Piquet Jr just spun his car at such incredible low speed. He recovered and drove on. Could he be practising for something? He crashed heavily in the race at high speed coming into a sharp turn, not at the same corner as he’practise’ earlier. These are the bits the investigation would be looking into.

  50. A lot of people are stating that the fact that Alonso was light fueled in Singapore means he *must* have known about it. Actually, if you look back, Renault regularly light fueled Alonso last year (Catalunya springs to mind, and actually Malaysia this year as well) in the hope that he’d be able to build up a lead before having to pit. It was a gamble, which just didn’t pay off, except in Singapore. Where, if you remember correctly, Alonso was fastest in practice, and undoubtedly would have started at the front end of the grid except for a fuel problem in Q2.

    Knowing that a good result was going to be hard to come by from 15th on the grid, and also knowing that it was a brand new street circuit, dark and slippery, I’d say that the chances of a safety car were pretty good. If I was the strategist at Renault, I too would have gone for an agressive strategy in the hope of taking advantage of any opportunity that came up.

    While I think it was no coincident that Piquet was the one that crashed – he was known as Nelsinho “Piroutte” Piquet after all, I really can’t beleive that it was done deliberately. We’ve seen deliberate crashes before, and they look just that. Deliberate. This looked just like Nelsinho on his usual sunday drive. And really, if Nelsinho had this sort of dirt of Renault – why would they fire him? He was already criticizing the team in the press before he was given the heave-ho, so there is little doubt in my mind that if he had beans to spill, once fired he would do so.

    This whole thing rings to me like a disgruntled ex-employee who having been dropped, wants his revenge on those who dropped him. Let’s not forget who his old man is, after all. I also wouldn’t be surprised at all to see the hand of S&Max in there somewhere – this has his fingerprints all over it.

    And like I asked yesterday – when did everyone start taking Nelsinho so seriously? For a long time he has been regarded as a joke – yet now every word that comes out of his mouth is gospel. Makes you wonder.

    And as for those who say Alonso *must* have been in on it, to you I ask – exactly when has Alonso demonstrated a ‘win at all costs’ mentality in the past?

    1. S&Max

      LOL :) :) !!!!!

    2. if you look back, Renault regularly light fueled Alonso

      To get him on pole yes. Putting almost no fuel in when you start from P15 is just ridiculous.

      They claimed that they were “hoping” for a safety car. Hoping or causing is then the question

      That safety car would have to come out in the few laps just after Alonso pitted and before the others did. That’s a window of a few laps. Sounds silly to base your strategy on that. Unless you could somehow imrpove the odds …

      exactly when has Alonso demonstrated a ‘win at all costs’ mentality in the past?

      Did you start watching after the 2007 season was over?

      1. Could you enlighten us showing when (and how) Fernando Alonso has demonstrated a “win at all costs” mentality?


        Ps: I started to watch F1 in mid 80’s.

        1. IDR?? Were you born in the mid 80’s or started to watch F1 in the mid 80’s? Even a person born in the mid 80’s wouldn’t have missed the 2007 Hungarian GP qualifying ;) How would you explain this tactic by Alonso? Wasn’t it “win at all costs” mentality?

          1. I was born in 1961.

            Old enough to not take “your pill” about 2007 Hungarian GP.

            We could talk years about that, arguing each other, but I’m pretty sure I’m not going to change your mind (as you are not going to change mine as well)

            So, if this is all you have, don’t waste your time. I’ll not waste mine’s (and mainly having to argue in English) :-)

          2. @ IDR

            Oh! I see where you come from. Never realized the fact that you were an Alonso worshiper.

            Ahora sé por qué usted acobardó de este argumento :) :) :)

          3. Intimidated?


            Just practical approach, I realized quite clearly you are a McLaren worshiper (thanks for this new word) :-)

          4. So, what’s your stand on the Hungary 2007 issue ?

      2. To get him on pole yes. Putting almost no fuel in when you start from P15 is just ridiculous.

        But not unusual, other teams have done it this year.

        1. Coulthard, Webber and Barrichello pitted just before the safety car as well having had a free choice of strategy. Having watched the race again recently I recall that Fernando was keen to get the softer tyre out of the way while he was unable to exploit the full potential of his car, which was inevitable when stuck in 15th behind slower and probably heavier cars.

          And Piquet’s a poor, accident prone driver.

          Maybe that’s what happened after all :)

          1. you watched that race again recently? how?

            how can you watch pervious races on demand can someone please tell me?

  51. David Drinkwater
    6th September 2009, 6:47

    Alonso is in a tricky position. lot hangs in the outcome and even then if Renault are found “not guilty” would you hire a driver who hs been involved (indirectly ?) in 2 major controversies. (Renault and Maclaren.
    Interesting to know what his relationship with Picquet is. He gave Hamilton enought grief with his flouncing attitude and now with Picquet ???
    Surely the telemetry of the Singapore incident can indicate whether the crash was self instigated .
    This would be a better indication of guilt or innocence than radio calls which could be disguised.

  52. David Drinkwater
    6th September 2009, 7:17

    Actually the incident I was referring to involved the teams in that Maclaren were involved in controversy with Ferrari at the time that Alonso was driving for Maclaren. Now Aloso is driving for renault and seems once again to be involved with a team that is emboiled in controversy. I am not attaching any proven significance – merely pointing it out. I ask the question ” Wold it be wise to hire a driver that has been involved in both major “scandals” ?

    But then Ferrari did continue to use Schumacker didn’t they and he was ………

    1. David … Drinkwater?

      You clearly drink things stronger than water.

      Have a cold shower and change your nick to something like “Watershower”

      1. What planet are you from ?

    2. David Drinkwater, i see your point, and it is interesting; I believe however that it is just a coincidence that Alonso was present and to some extent involved in both incidences, spy gate and the Nelsinho “Piroutte”… I dont think theses issues have much to do with him directly but one never knows for sure…

      Schumacher is different story everything he did was done by him alone on track, and he paid severely for those mistakes as they were blatantly obvious which probably suggests that he isn’t a very good cheater..

      1. I do not believe in coincendence on this level, 1 time maybe…2 times there is a pattern here.

        And your are right about schumacher.. he was caught and penalized and no one else was there to shelter him..nor did he try to involve others.

        All the goings on involving alonso he has been sheltered to some extent… I think that he is no choir boy and maybe if he is proven intertwined in this soap opera that he will ultimately pay a high price. I would not want him if I owned a team if I wanted it to look as if I was a fair player.

        Maybe Ron Dennis was right to have alonso leave the team…he must know something and is smiling at the current issue involving alonso.
        If I were Whitmarsh I wouldnt touch him for any price or if he paid to drive the car. They have hamilton, who has shown that he is a team player and as a rookie was the equal of alonso.

        1. Maybe Ron Dennis was right to have alonso leave the team…he must know something and is smiling at the current issue involving alonso.

          hmmm … well, if there “is” something, these people should come forward with the information now because these issues need to be resolved soon.

          I very much doubt that Alonso will be able to muddle with things at Ferrari since they usually work as a team and they all trust one another. Personally I think Alonso is a great driver, however he would not be my first pick for Ferrari since he has shown on many occasions that he is not much of a team player ,.. but its too late now Ferrari got sucked in and he will be there – maybe I am wrong and Alonso is indeed a great team player – we will find out next year or the year after.

  53. A Brazilian TV reporter makes a comment during a live transmission.

    Nobody (readers) knows:
    Who is the man who started all this.
    What kinds of circumstances make the FIA start an investigation hiring a high profile private investigation company (Quest).
    Who are the people involved (except Nelsinho should be in… “for sure”)
    What kind of evidences FIA has found for summoning Renault F1 Team.
    F1 Blogs and websites are publishing articles full of “What ifs” and “Allegedly”.
    None of the people (allegedly) involved have made any kind of public declaration.

    And despite all this:

    There is nearly a 40% of F1 fans believing a F1 Team owned by a big Car Manufacturer can behave as a Gang, ordering a driver (not a gangster) put his life (and other’s drivers life, and the life of the fans) at risk, with the blessing of the Team mate, all of this just for a bunch of points, not even a win, not to say a Championship (You all agree, Renault could not do anything to create Massa’s fuel rig problem, I hope)

    In addition to that, a portion of the other 40% do not believe this, only because they think Nelsinho has not enough skill for doing this, or because they think nobody could find any track record to prove the case. So, at the end, this people also think a F1 Team could behave that way.

    I’m really impressed with the low level F1 has achieved, and the disillusion of a big portion of the F1 fan base.

    But what can we expect from a sport controlled (and represented) by a man with no dignity; a man who pays for obtaining personal satisfaction by punishing other human beings or for being punished by others…

    1. There is nearly a 40% of F1 fans believing a F1 Team owned by a big Car Manufacturer can behave as a Gang

      First of all i would like to clarify my stand on this issue. I still believe majority of the Renault staff are innocent. My only problem is in the upper echelon. In particular one Mr Flavio Briatore. It wouldn’t be the first time he has employed objectionable tactics to turn things in his favor, in this case his number 1 driver. Just consider this, renault at that point in time had gone winless for almost 2 years , they also knew the fact that ING was pulling out of F1. In times of desperation you tend to do things without considering the consequences. After all Renault is a manufacturer who have with drawn from the sport twice in 1985 & 1997. Maybe the renault bosses had laid out a deadline for Flavio & his f1 team to win at least a race before the end of the season. So the only possible circuits where technical advantage would be nullified was the 2 unknown new circuits valencia & singapore. Now we all know what happened at valencia, Alonso was taken out on lap 1. Who knows what could have happened if he wasn’t taken out, maybe piquet would have crashed over the bridge or something, cuz that is the only place on the entire circuit inaccessible to cranes. So uncle Flav & Nando missed their chance at valencia. Their only other chance was singapore, but this time failure wasn’t an option. So they went for it 7 executed their plan to perfection. but i still reiterate the fact that the only conspirators were Flav,nando & Jr.

      1. So, if you find a person who has not make love in two years, this person is a rapist without no doubt.

        but i still reiterate the fact that the only conspirators were Flav,nando & Jr.

        Well, this is your wish, we all know you…

        1. So, if you find a person who has not make love in two years, this person is a rapist without no doubt.

          I didn’t get your point.

          Well, this is your wish, we all know you…

          It is not my wish. I don’t want the sport i love to be tarnished.

          And I’m sure you don’t know me.

          1. Sorry, surely my English is not good enough.

            You make your point based on the lack of wins of Renault in the last two years…

            And yes, I’m sure also I don’t know you, only what you think about F Alonso and everything around him. :-)

    2. IDR, while you may think you are right and the 40% are wrong, there was a very interesting article in ‘The Official Formula 1 Review 2008’ book about the suspicions that were raised at the time of the Singapore GP by rival team strategists and drivers. I have posted it several times. You only have to get the book yourself to read it – it is a public document. While these are “only suspicions”, the F1 Guide thought they were important enough to include in the Official book. So do you think these rival team strategists and others in F1 with suspicions are similarly “at a low level”? The reason for the suspicions in the first place was the madness of the strategy which miraculously became fortuitous. Please read the passage and then say whether you think the suspicions are ridiculous.

      Again, it could all be untrue, but as Joe Saward says in his blog, it should be investigated if evidence has come to light and not swept under the carpet, or is that what you would like to happen? And F1 isn’t the only sport that has dirty dealings.

      1. S Huges, I don’t think I’m right and the 40% are wrong. Maybe I’m wrong, who knows really. I only think it’s highly improbable.

        I was trying to highlight it is really impressive how things goes in this sport to a point in wich a significant portion of people doesn’t think that kind of behaviour is highly improbable.

        And (IMHO) that’s because the scandals we’ve seen during the latest years, including M Mosley case.

        I’m pretty sure if, given the same circumstances, some issues come to light regarding Nadal & Federer last year Wimbledon’s final, nobody would have ticked “Yes” option.

        ps: I read your comment… twice! (well, one and a half, to be honest)

        1. IDR, you never answered my question!!

          You asked:

          Could you enlighten us showing when (and how) Fernando Alonso has demonstrated a “win at all costs” mentality?


          Ps: I started to watch F1 in mid 80’s.

          Were you born in the mid 80’s or started to watch F1 in the mid 80’s? Even a person born in the mid 80’s wouldn’t have missed the2007 Hungarian GP qualifying ;) How would you possibly explain this tactic by Alonso? Wasn’t it “win at all costs” mentality?

          1. I have already answered you but in the place the question was posted!

    3. IDR Your comments below probably sum up the whole problem of F1.
      I’m really impressed with the low level F1 has achieved, and the disillusion of a big portion of the F1 fan base.

      But what can we expect from a sport controlled (and represented) by a man with no dignity; a man who pays for obtaining personal satisfaction by punishing other human beings or for being punished by others…

      If your leadership has no dignity or moral compass(ethically or otherwise) then why should any of the competitors have any. By competitors I mean the teams thru the drivers.

      If they dont get a handle on this then they will become irrelavent.

      1. Hungary 2007 wasn’t a ‘win at all costs’ mentality. There is far more to that story than meets the eye, and various rumours have abounded ever since about that – including that McLaren told Alonso to delay Hamilton & then left him high & dry at the FIA hearing into the matter.

        I’m not surprised you brought it up though, and seriously if that is the best you can do to convince people of Alonso’s nefarious character, you better go back to the drawing board ;)

  54. I cant seriously believe that anyone would give credit to this. Nelson Piquet Jr spun/crashed at every track he drove on in F1…absolutely ridiculous and sour grapes by a family that seem to be doing everything they can to cause trouble for a team they did not have control over. Sucked in I say to the Piquets of this world and all this does is make everyone see them for the vindictive bunch of non-talents they really are :p

  55. I voted no. Piquet jr isn’t much of a driver. Even though “push, Nelsinho” could have been a keyword for Piquet to crash on purpose, we all know that when he pushes it usually doesn’t end well.

    I don’t get it why people keep saying he was practising on warm-up lap when he spun. He almost hit the wall on that occasion and thus he almost ruined the alleged plan before the race even started. It’s more likely he spun because he’s a bad driver.

    And as stated before, if someone wants to crash deliberately spinning isn’t a good choice, because the driver can’t be sure his car hits the wall (as seen on warm-up lap).

    1. if someone wants to crash deliberately spinning isn’t a good choice

      But by spinning he convinced laymen that he lost control blah blah. But i still feel the best way for him to bring out the safety car was to stall the engine in the middle of the tortoise. No risk involved.

      1. Deliberately stalling the engine would probably have been too obvious on the telemetry. I think as Keith mentioned before, it was pretty much the perfect crash to bring out the safety car without endangering himself or arousing suspicion from the crash itself.

      2. If it was deliberate then he did it in the best way possible, he just gave it too much power and it swapped ends. How do you stall a car that has anti-stall without making that look suspicious ?

  56. I hope Ferrari get a fine for purposefully mucking up in the pits to allow Alonso to win as well…
    And A Sutil for crashing…

    Maybe Massa should have binned the car at Brazil last year and made a red flag to come out on last lap….!!!
    Then the would have had to go back to the lap before….

    Maybe they should fine toyota for Timo and his pathetic driving to allow LH thru…

    PK is a crap f1 driver with a axe to grind and the fact Mad Max hate Flabio as well makes this seem like a witch hunt. Why would Renualt want to bin a car so early when Massa was always going to win the race is beyond me.
    I am calling the BS flag myself..and if it’s true I hope PK gets banned from motorsport for life for his part.

  57. No-one else has mentioned this:

    The two Red Bull drivers and Rubens Barrichello also started outside the top 10 in Singapore and had a free choice of fuel load: They all pitted before Piquet crashed and also benefitted from the safety car, sooooo perhaps it wasn’t such a ridiculous strategy after all, especially as Alonso was also keen to get all of his running on the unfancied softer tyre out of the way while he was in traffic anyway – inevitable when starting 15th on the grid.

    Also, remember Piquet’s podium in Germany? Had the safety car not come out a lap after he stopped, Piquet would have ended up about 15th. Safety cars are known to shake up the order and especially at Singapore where it is very difficult to overtake, it’s likely to have a significant influence on the result.


    1. Both good points.

      1. Good point about the Red Bulls, Webber was put in with a great chance of a win or a least a podium by the Piquet crash as well.

        Also Piquet’s podium at Hockenheim shows Renault often tend to think outside the box with strategy, indeed he was on an unusually long strategy in Singapore to try and take advantage of a possible safety car.

      2. Both good points that prove that those further down the grid hope for a safety car in their strategy to aid them in their race position.

        But a safety car is not always guaranteed.
        Cue conspiracy theory.
        I still voted No. I just don’t want to believe that these things happen in F1. Maybe I’m being blinkered about it.

        It seems to be Renaults turn to get all the bad press this year, with investigations and fines.

  58. I voted don’t know as we can only speculate about possibility of a conspiracy. Unless the evidence that was mentioned gets published of course.

  59. The FIA presumably wouldnt be taking action unless they thought there was a case to answer, think of the millions of pounds of bets that go F1 races around the world – it’s a very serious business when there’s accusations of cheating.

    It’s interesting that Massa instantly thought Piquet spun on purpose, would he have accused them at the time if he wasn’t fairly certain.

  60. Imagine if it was Hamilton who benefited!!! They’d have him hanging by his feet already.

    Im somewhat perplexed at Keiths “too incredible” claim. As Murray once said “anything can happen in F1 and usually does.” I always wondered how it hadnt happened years ago and to be honest it probably has but up until recently when computers ran predictions through the race, it was usually so chaotic the teams just concentrated on keeping their own cars circulating.

    Briatori looks (and acts) about as trustowrthy as a snake but that doesnt mean he and Renault are guilty. If they are guilty and i believe they are, then Renault will withdraw immedietely. In the current climate that cannot be allowed to happen so they will not be found guilty.

    1. Imagine if it was Hamilton who benefited!!! They’d have him hanging by his feet already.

      I disagree respectfully.
      Only things that can be proven with absolute certainty will get that driver or the persons involved hanged by their feet. That applies to any driver.

    2. I agree wholeheartedly with all your post, re. if it was Lewis, re. whether they are guilty and re. whether the truth will come out.

      1. hmmm… what makes you say that?

  61. Until I see some the evidence the FIA has I will believe that Piquet did not crash on purpose. But if the FIA do decide he was ordered to crash at Singapore are they going to investigate all Piquet’s other crashes in F1, as that is hardly is only one.

  62. err respectfully, the comment was slightly tongue in cheek…but perhaps you dont remember the anti- hamilton hysteria of less than 12 months ago. Especially the Spa farce… or Sparce!

    1. but perhaps you dont remember the anti- hamilton hysteria of less than 12 months ago.

      are you talking about the lie saga?

      Especially the Spa farce… or Sparce!

      Well the Spa thing doesn’t really compare to Piquet. and there is nothing hidden behind the scenes. Whether Lewis deserved that penalty or not based on the public opinion is another matter that can probably be disputed indefinitely. However a decisions was made on that based on visual evidence. Again totally different situation to Piquet. Personally i don’t think the punishment anything do with the fact that this was Hamilton.

  63. Hard to believe, which does not mean impossible.
    If we have a look of what this funny and fat version of “Don Juan” has done in the past and how his spanish colleague has behaved, your get a sensation of “I prefer not to believe it but….”

    I really hope that if this is proved, the fat funny man get his rear kicked as hard as Piquet followed his instructions. And, of course if this was true I don’t think Trickonso didn’t know about it.

  64. The brazilian chanel Globo has a video comparison of the spin Piquet had at the formation lap and the crash at the race itself. It’s at least interesting. Watch the video link below and pay atention at 1:40m mark of the video.


  65. I just watched that video, and if Nelsinho managed to do that on purpose, he should have been using his skills to win races instead.
    In the main crash, he actually missed the outer wall by very little, how dumb would it have looked to just break a suspension arm and stay in track with a hanging wheel… and no safety car.
    Now look again at his “practice” spin. Look at the mark his rear wheel leaves. He missed that wall there by what, 1 inch? Think that the rear wing hang well behind the wheel. And only because he went past the gap in the wall that makes the track wider.
    I say he just crashed.
    Alonso is well known to push the limit, to play hard, to be the worse looser in the world… but in the track, he normally makes space for other people and wins or loses in the legal side. He wouldn’t enjoy winning like that.

    1. I agree – he would only want to win on merit. Although I must say that at the time, I did think that Alonso didn’t look very happy after he had won.

      Still don’t beleive the conspiracy though. I guess we can debate it ad nauseum, the FIA have prolly made up their minds already before the hearing has even started (a la Spa 2008), and all we’ll ever know about what went on is some pat press release afterward. *sigh*

      1. Agree about Alonso’s appearance intitially after the race, he didn’t seem too happy. But at the time i put it down to him being tired, and considering he produced one of his trademark celebrations in prac ferme and looked much happier in later photos i dont think anything can be made of it.

        As for the Spa decision, i guess you mean the rejection of the appeal as inadmissable. Well that was quite an obvious decision because it was a stupid appeal. It’s clearly stated in the rules that a 25 second penalty given post race in place of a drive through penalty cannot be appealed. Regardless of the merits of the penalty the appeal was inadmissable.

        1. A post-race 25 second penalty was reversed for Trulli this year.

  66. I don’t think that was on puspose, because Massa make a big mistake on pit and it wasn’t Alonso falut, beside, on Japan Alonso won again and he doesn’t had tha fault on Hamilton and Massa’s error

  67. I would say and only from my own culture’s perspective but anyone who is prepared to “whistle blow” their employer if they dont do what they want would be prepared to do anything including this. Make no bones about it, Alonso attempted to blackmail Mclaren so if you ask COULD Alonso be party to what happened in Singapore then id say 100% yes. If you ask did it ACTUALLY happen then id only be 70% sure. If you ask will they be found guilty then id say im only 10% sure.

    Does it further erode the integrity of F1? well it depends on your perspective but F1 (or top line racing) ceased being a sport in 1902 and became a business and integrity in business is rarer than hens teeth.

  68. I don’t think they’re implicated.

  69. I haven’t read all comments, but I’m wondering are we thinking about Flavio enough ? Maybe he had reasons to get at least one victory at season. Maybe he had promised something to Renault and he saw that Singapore was their last chance. Fernando or Nelson did not had any reason to take this kind of risk, maybe Flavio had ? I don’t think he is very honest guy..

  70. Clearly Piquet junior is a pretty poor driver who failed to make any progress whilst at Renault. If he was an honourable person then he would have raised this issue when he was first approached to crash to order. I don’t recall anyone voicing that the crash seemed odd at the time. It is not surprising that when people are told an accident is suspect that they start to see a situation that isn’t there – similar to conspiracy theories that people love. It would be tragic if the employees at Renault lose their jobs just so the Moseley can get his own back on Flavio. Get rid of Moseley and I suspect the the news from F1 would be less tacky.

  71. Absolutely brilliant post guys, been following your blog for 3 days now and i should say i am starting to like your post. and now how do i subscribe to your blog?

Comments are closed.