Massa suspects Alonso knew about Crashgate plan

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Felipe Massa believes his former team mate Fernando Alonso knew of Renault’s plan to help him win the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix by causing a deliberate crash.

Massa lost the race to Alonso after Nelson Piquet Jnr, driving the second Renault, deliberately crashed his car on lap 14. This caused a Safety Car period which propelled Alonso to the front of the field.

Massa, who parted ways with Ferrari at the end of last year, said Alonso “knew everything” about the plan when asked about it in a recent interview for Autosport. “But he would never tell me,” Massa added.

The details of Renault’s plan to cause the crash came to light almost 12 months after the race. The FIA banned Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds from the sport for their involvement, but accepted Alonso’s denial he had prior knowledge of the plan.

Symonds has since returned to F1 and is now chief technical officer at Williams, who Massa has joined this year. “For sure, I will discuss it with him,” said Massa of Symonds, “but I am sure he is not the most important guy in what happened”.

“Sometimes people pay more than they need to,” Massa added. “I know how it works, these situations, in F1 but I will definitely talk to him.”

Massa, who has previously likened the race to a fixed football match, failed to score after a pit lane mishap during the Safety Car period triggered by Piquet Jnr’s crash. The points he lost to championship rival Lewis Hamilton that day ultimately cost him the 2008 title.

Massa added the FIA should have “cancelled” the result of the after once the truth came to light in September 2009.

2014 F1 season

Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

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 “Massa suspects Alonso knew about Crashgate plan”

  1. And why does he come up with it now? Because he left Ferrari? Lol that’s poor Felipe!

    1. Because it would have disrupted team harmony if there ever was one and LdM surely would not have accepted that.

      1. I’m sure Alonso was involved, because he wouldn’t have agreed to an otherwise stupid race strategy of going super-light on fuel without a good reason given to him. When Alonso pitted very early, it didn’t really make sense. 2 laps later, when Piquet crashed and deployment of the safety car was clearly unavoidable, I immediately thought “Well now Alonso’s strategy makes a lot more sense … clever ******** these Renault guys!”.

        1. Andrew Simmons
          10th January 2014, 17:23

          He didn’t agree to the strategy. He questioned the team over the radio why they were coming in so early and wanted to stay out.

          1. Dzi (@dzaci214sid)
            10th January 2014, 17:52

            Well, that’s exactly what they wanted you to hear… It’s like he didn’t agreed to that strategy… ;)

          2. Might all be part of the play. Like “Fernando is faster than you”.

        2. you forgot one thing… all team radios are monitored by the FIA. If Alonso was told of the plan don’t you guys think that the FIA would have caught it?

          “Well, that’s exactly what they wanted you to hear… It’s like he didn’t agreed to that strategy… ;)”

          you mean they discussed it even before it happened?! get a grip.

          1. Why bring this up again? here’s why? Massa was completely outclassed by Alonso when they were team mates. In fact after Ferrari/Alonso Massa went from a guy who could potentially win a championship to a somewhat good driver compared to Alonso. Massa is clearly trying to save face by casting doubt over Alonso. Why crashgate and not team orders? Well because Alonso has showed that even if Massa didn’t follow team orders that Alonso was be able to pass him anyway.

    2. Well….. Probably yes.

    3. @adames2x

      [he was]asked about it in a recent interview for Autosport.

    4. Because he is professional. Hence he will now discuss it with Symonds to hopefully find out what really happened, so they can move forwards in 2014. Most likely, Symonds will say it was Flavio or Fernando that came up with the whole plot (my money’s on Flavio!), while he got caught up in the middle of it, possibly taking the fall so Fernando didn’t have to.

    5. Massa also brought it up in 2009 just before he became teammates with Alonso.

      I’d say it’s coming up again because he left Alonso. :P

      1. “McLaren boss Martin Whitmarsh offered Ferrari a piece of advice on how to manage the Spaniard last week, “I’m sure as long as Fernando is winning everything will be fine.””

        Best part of the article :P

        1. Well Mac managed to lose LH, so I guess he ought to know.

    6. Sour grapes Felipe.

      It’s as poor as your driving.

      1. Sour grapes or not, Alonso knew for sure! It’s not like they didn’t told Alonso the plan, let’s be honest!

  2. Gloves off!

    1. I wouldnt say Alonso was the main benefactor in this crashgate and it makes little sense that the conspirators will tell him of the plan, considering their goal was to use it to convince Alonso to stay with them for another year.

      1. Tbh I’m not convinced he did know about it at the time, but figured it out pretty quickly. He’s not a stupid guy, and did not look as pleased on the podium as he would normally. In fact he looked pretty annoyed, I’d assume because he didn’t approve

  3. Really? Get over it Massa?

    1. Why the hell would he get over it, the guy got away with it scott free.

      1. They didn’t though, Piquet Jr, Briatorie and Symmonds were all punished.

        1. No, none of them were punished in the end.

          1. Maybe I’m wrong here but didn’t Symonds got a 5 year ban from F1 and Briatore a life time one?

          2. Initially, yes, but the French courts overturned their punishment.

    2. Really? My heart aches for the lad every time the grim details and implications of this day come up! Yeah he’s letting it all hang out now but that’s only because he can, think what he’s been repressing for the years he’s been at Ferrari just for the sake of his job. I’m surprised he’s not exploded yet.

      He should save some stuff for his Autobiography though, that will be juicy ;)

      1. @kartingjimbo – 100% agree. Every time I think of the points lost in 2008 due to this, it hurts my heart for Felipe.

        – An Alonso and Hamilton Supporter

      2. Nothing (politically) stopped him voicing those concerns in 2009.

        1. @raceprouk

          That’s why he voiced his concerns in 2009 also.

    3. Your asking Massa “to get over” losing the crown jewel of his career – which he’s in fact dealt with incredible class – because you have no problem with some guy who is willing to cheat his way to the flag while his team mate’s physical health and/or life is put at risk?

      Massa did not bring this up; he was asked about it. Alonso, meanwhile, has been very outspoken about his belief that Massa did not deserve the 2008 title because, ahem, he did not win it. Which may or may not have something to do with Singapore and Renault.

      1. Alonso, meanwhile, has been very outspoken about his belief that Massa did not deserve the 2008 title

        Can you remind me what he said because I don’t remember any quote to that effect from Alonso.

        1. If anything, I remember Alonso saying a lot of things about wanting McLaren not to win any titles.

      2. Nick is correct, Alonso clearly stated several times he did not want McLaren to win.

    4. I would personally never get over the loss of a world title that was affected by something like this. Never. I’d be bitter to my grave, but that’s just me. :)

    5. Probably a lot easier to get over when the nearest you’ve come to a World Championship is on F1 2013 on your Xbox/PS.

      I’d have trouble getting over being cheated.

    6. Are you kidding me? The guy lost a Formula One World Championship as a result of this safety car. Why should he get over it?

      1. He didnt lose it in one race, he lost it in a season.

        1. The gap at the end of the season was one point.
          Massa also had more race wins than Hamilton (a metric which technically doesn’t mean anything, but disproves your theory that he “lost it” in the season).
          Even if he didn’t get on the podium in that race, he would’ve scored points, which meant winning the championship.

          1. If we’re going to play the wouldacouldashoulda game, then I’m sure other moments over the season could be brought up ahem-ahem-SPAFRANCORCHAMPS-ahem.

            Plus, it’s not Alonso’s fault Ferrari sent Massa off with the fuel hose attached.

            Actually, sod it. Massa’s the 2008 champ. There. Done.

    7. To be honest, I have a degree of scepticism myself. Would the main benefactor really know nothing about it? I find that a bit hard to believe.

      1. Left in the dark for plausible deniability. Even if Alonso might have known something was up, don’t ask, don’t tell…

      2. Jack (@jackisthestig)
        9th January 2014, 21:24

        He’s not called teflonso because of his frying pan collection…

      3. He was not the main benefactor! The main benefactor was his team, who by using the result of crash gate convinced Alonso to stay with them. The entire reason it was done was to convinced alonso that the team can win.

  4. Come on Felipe, let this go. 2008 wasn’t to be, yes you drove well and came close, yes you didn’t get the rub of the green in Singapore, but you got good luck on a few other occasions (to take the win at Spa and when he got handed a few more points by Raikkonen in China). It just wasn’t supposed to be.

    1. Yes. It’s not Alonso’s fault that Massa drove off with a fuel hose still attached.
      And he had 3 races afterwards to score more points than Hamilton – so I’ve never bought his sob story about it losing him the championship.

      1. You’re right it wasn’t Alonso’s fault, it was Ferrari’s.

      2. It’s not Alonso’s fault that Massa drove off with a fuel hose still attached.

        That is exactly why Massa scored no points that day. It is almost certain that regardless of what other teams were doing that Massa wouldn’t have been in the points that day. It wasn’t just 3 other races that Massa & Ferrari had the opportunity to score more points than Hamiltion & McLaren, it was something like 19 other races they had that opportunity. The team that makes the least mistakes wins the world championships.
        I think Massa should keep his peace over things like this because all it does is make people at Williams have suspicous thoughts about him and wish they hadn’t recruited him. Regardless of what Alonso says or might say, the fact is those comments about that event are clouded by the fact of time and that they are from his perspective. Whether Alonso suspected Piquet’s plans or not is really a matter for him and his conscience. Some things just have to wait until Judgement Day to be sorted out.
        I think the sad thing about this is it makes Massa look in a bad light.
        Yes, he is no longer with Ferrari, but he was, and that is something the rest of us will never have, and sure, there are lots of reasons why he left, but one cannot argue that somewhere in all of the long equation of reasons leading to Ferrari’s decision is Massa himself and his performance. What Massa should want is to make it look like the factors relating to him were unjustified, but comments like this do the exact opposite, they make it look like Ferrari were justified in letting him go.

        1. Massa would have been better off saying next question please.

          Not to mention, the conversation with Symonds should be how can we make the 2014 Williams go faster since we are both grateful to have a job here now.

          1. @bullmello that’s my thoughts exactly.

    2. @geemac I understand what you are saying, but in this case it wasn’t bad luck that got him, I think this situation and the race at Spa can’t be compared. The Singapore GP was fixed, so in my opinion it wasn’t bad luck or an “act of God” that put things out of his favor, it was a deliberate event created by a group of people, therefore in this one I agree with Massa, the race should have been cancelled

      1. Personally, although this was certainly more disgusting, I think terrible stewarding decisions also don’t count as ‘bad luck’.

      2. In principle, I agree, but you can’t unscramble an egg… Others scored points, etc and to invalidate the result would have been wrong, however they should have taken the win away from Alonso who would almost surely have known something was up, if not being totally in on the whole thing. Briatore and Symonds both said it was Piquet’s idea, but surely Briatore would have told Alonso without actually saying anything incriminating in advance of the race, otherwise how can you explain the fuel strategy? It was a big mess, plain and simple. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who knows about cheating in advance should be barred for life from the sport for losing perspective and bringing the sport into (more) disrepute… Not yo mention an old-fashioned idea that has probably seen it’s final days: a sense of honour and personal responsibility for your actions. Just MHO .:)

    3. Just like McLaren stuffed up 2007, Ferrari stuffed up 2008. Both had outside assistance in this, however (McLaren having Ferrari car data, Renault having data and getting off with no fine.. Renault fixing Singapore, eventually leaving F1).

    4. He drove brilliantly, He was the class of the field!

    5. Why you having a go at Massa for answering a question in an interview? Must he refuse to answer? He is just giving his opinion – seems you just don’t like the answer and what it could mean.

  5. Alonso “knew everything” about the plan when asked about it in a recent interview for Autosport. “But he would never tell me,” Massa added.

    And what if Alonso didn’t know? I can understand Massa’s frustrations at losing a race which might have gone a long way in helping him win the championship, but he really should move on and draw a line under it, nothing he can do will change the past. The evidence (or lack thereof) shows that Alonso didn’t know anything about it, but if he somehow did, then it’s up to him to tell everyone.

    1. The evidence (or lack thereof) shows that Alonso didn’t know anything about it,

      Does it? How so?

      1. “Innocent until proven guilty” is a basic tenet of civilized life. Would you pay a speeding ticket if your neighbour whined to the local cops?
        Massa has gone way down in my esteem.

        1. @paul-a just to add to it: in the U.S. you have to prove your innocence … (but I agree with you :))

          1. Just to clarify, in the US, the government or the state, as the case may be, must prove a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A defendant does not have to prove his innocence.

      2. The lack thereof part it supposed to imply that there is no evidence.

    2. I imagine Massa has suspicions now considering he knows the way Alonso works with the team. Other than the people at Renault at the time he probably has a better idea than anyone.

    3. Its obvious alonso didnt know.

      Anyone with any memory of the time, not after… will remember that renault were in a mess and threatening to leave the sport. Flav, Pat & Nelson all had something to gain from it… Alonso didnt, yes a win but he wasnt fighting for the title & he didnt need to prove himself to keep or get a seat. Gain not worth the risk.

      As for the strategy it was perfectly normal for a fast car out of position. Honda and Red Bull tried the same strategy that day. As did ferrari at monaco 2 years before.

      1. Honda and Red Bull tried the same strategy that day.

        No they didn’t, they started on different tyres.

        1. the fuel strategy was effectively the same.

          As was rosberg and kubica.

  6. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    9th January 2014, 12:47

    Whilst this strikes me as a bit like having a go at someone whilst walking away from them, i must admit that I admire Felipe for at least talking about it openly and personably, rather than spewing the same old F1 Driver/Robot PR nonsense.

    And for that I respect Felipe.

    Same situation when Vettel criticized the double points rule. I gained a lot of respect for Sebastian at that moment, as he was the only one to actually speak his mind.

    1. Red Bull also criticized the rule. Vettel obviously was allowed to speak his mind so was Ricciardo.

      1. You’re talking about a man who gladly broke team orders, and said he would do it again.

        I don’t think Vettel has a problem saying what he thinks.

        1. I don’t take FM’s suspicions as open and personable, but rather petty and vindictive when they don’t shed any new light on the subject and it just comes across as whiny woulda, coulda, shoulda.

          I don’t take SV’s comments on double points as anything unique when the concept has been practically universally shot down by those within as well as outside F1. And his opinion should come as no surprise when as the 4 in a row WDCer he stands to lose the most from points manipulation that could help him lose a 5th in a row.

          And SV may have no problem saying what he thinks but when he (heroicly to some) ignored the team order he looked sheepish and embarrassed post-race, and wouldn’t even look MW in the eye in the staging room and on the podium. If SV was truly the purebred WDC letting nothing stand in his way as some want to portray him, why didn’t he own his actions immediately and with defiance? Rather, he defied the team and it’s sponsors that had done so much for him up until then, put them in a very uncomfortable spot, thought only of himself (I guess LdM would never hire him, right?) and then only eventually said he would do it again. Not what I personally envision as an F1 ‘great.’

          1. petty and vindictive

            I know right? It’s not like Alonso was involved in race fixing that directly cost him the championship. It’s not like talking out about it earlier might have cost him one of the best seats going or anything…..

            Oh wait.

          2. “…Alonso was involved in race fixing that directly cost him (I assume you mean FM) the championship.’

            Was he? How so?

            “…talking about it earlier might have cost him one of the best seats going…”

            Really? How so? Do you mean he wouldn’t have been retained and forced to accept millions of dollars to knowingly be the non-rooster on the team?

          3. Perhaps his sheepishness was somewhat influenced by MW swerving at his car after the race finish?

          4. What, like SV was shocked and felt threatened by MW’s swerve? Please.

            Believe me I am no proponent of team orders, but in this case and imho, SV gave the finger to the team, not just MW, by cheaply passing MW who SV knew had been instructed to crank his car down for preservation’s sake, and then only owned up to it well after the fact as something he would do again.

            I get wanting to tag a WDC level driver as letting nothing stand in his way, like a great or a legend would do…I just did not find Malaysia 2013 to be an example of that.

          5. It’s not like he was expecting that, or the talking to from Adrian in the cooling down room, never mind the subsequent media storm. I’d still rather Seb have immediately said that he passed Mark because he was faster (and IMO, he was) instead of the silly apology, though.

          6. @Robbie
            “and wouldn’t even look MW in the eye in the staging room and on the podium.”

            lol. Nice try at revisionist history. Watch it again, Vettel even pulls Webber back to talk to him as they leave the podium.

            Vettel was almost certainly taken aback that Webber suddenly turned into such a whiny hypocrite regarding team orders. The “Aussie Grit” who vehemently stated that he races until the end and would accept no team orders was suddenly stomping his feat calling “no fair” when the tables are turned.

          7. You’re talking about as they leave the podium, and we don’t know what was said. I’m talking about coming out of the car, and being in the staging room, right after the race. And I highly doubt SV was taken aback. As if MW was not going to react negatively, when he had been instructed by the team to crank his car down and was a sitting duck. When MW ignored a team order, were the circumstances the same? And I don’t know the answer to this question but perhaps someone knows more details…how did SV react when MW ignored a team order? I’m assuming he said good job, and there’s the sign of a true Champion, and then shook his hand?

          8. @robbie The way I see it, Vettel knew what he was doing, he passed (as he was faster anyway). SV may or may not have been expecting negativity from a driver who once said “I’m not fine with it (a team order), no. Of course I ignored the team and I was battling to the end”, but wasn’t expecting the negativity to the extent shown by Webber especially immediately after the chequered flag (i.e. the swerve, which occurred in the middle of Vettel celebrating the win). Plus Adrian Newey was in the room before going out onto the podium, not after.

            And though your final question is more aimed at Dwight_js. I don’t really see its relevance. For the record Vettel didn’t appear to react negatively at all toward Webber at Silverstone 2011. Though in fairness you could say the fact Webber didn’t get past the sitting duck SV was in that case, helped.

          9. how did SV react when MW ignored a team order? I’m assuming he said good job, and there’s the sign of a true Champion, and then shook his hand?

            Well, they shared the British podium 2011 together after Webber ignored team orders. Vettel didn’t try to antagonise Webber there.

        2. Jack (@jackisthestig)
          9th January 2014, 21:50

          Disobeying team orders is not illegal, cheating is.

          What actually happened in Malaysia was a fantastic spectacle, the best wheel-to-wheel racing we saw all season. The self-centred killjoys on the Red Bull pit wall tried to prevent that and it amazes me how many fans take offence on the team’s behalf. Why would any fan not want to watch two teammates going wheel-to-wheel because it risks a collision? Red Bull and Webber clearly have no regard for viewers of the sport.

          1. @jackisthestig

            Why would any fan not want to watch two teammates going wheel-to-wheel because it risks a collision?

            Because it was Vettel who came out on top. If the roles had been reversed every single one of those so called fans would have praised Webber for it and used it as a prime example of how Vettel always needs the teams protection.

          2. @david-a Bottom line for me…SV had to know it was a cheap shot to pass MW who had been told to crank it down. SV had to know MW was going to be furious. Hence MW’s exclamations to SV, while SV refused to look him in the eye, “Multi 21 Seb…Multi 21”

            SV didn’t immediately own his actions, and instead looked like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar. We could all feel the tension even through the TV. All I’m saying is for me that was not the sign of a legend who is not letting anything stand in his way, but rather someone who knew he did a cheap thing and only later owned it.

            The only reason I have referenced 2011 is because others have said it is hypocritical of MW since he also ignored an order, but as we know the circumstances were entirely different and SV was certainly not a sitting duck in 2011 as you are suggesting. At least MW was racing a healthy teammate, and he owned his move immediately. SV had the advantage of MW cranked down by team instruction, which was no doubt the reason for the order. They weren’t trying to handicap MW so that SV could have a cakewalk of getting by him.

            I have a feeling that had SV ignored a team order in 2013 under more similar circumstances to 2011…mid-season race…2 laps to go…nobody on ‘Multi 21’ …racing for 2nd and 3rd with the leader too far ahead to catch…SV unable to get by MW, MW might have said to Seb something like ‘Hey, nice try, just like me at Silverstone 2011,’ not a hypocritical ‘Hey, no fair!’

          3. David not Coulthard (@)
            10th January 2014, 14:52

            Didn’t Webber crank down his engine because he needed to save fuel, and Vettel needed to do so to a much lesser extent having used less fuel earlier in the race?

    2. Agreed.

    3. Vetted spoke his mind because he would have lost one of his titles had the rule been in place in 2012.

      Although frankly I wasn’t surprised by the criticism: it is an absolutely ridiculous proposition, and should be removed immediately (or the length of the Abu Dhabi GP be extended to 600km, however boring that may be).

  7. I’m not sure whether I should respect Massa for what he has put up with from Alonso/Ferrari or to think of him as a weakling for the same reason. I mean the level of self control he needed for that must be about 18 out of 10, but still, helping the guy that arguably robbed you of a world title while putting your career on hold in the process is pretty lame. Just saying.

    1. helping the guy that arguably robbed you of a world title

      The Crashgate obviously didn’t help Massa in 2008, but he still must look at himself as to why he lost the championship. Had he not spun off in Malaysia or performed as poorly as he did at Silverstone he would still have been champion.

      1. The Crashgate obviously didn’t help Massa in 2008

        Without it occurring he’d be champion. Irregardless of other mishaps.

        1. @mike
          It’s never that easy. There were still 3 races after Singapore and Ferrari and McLaren (and perhaps other teams also) would’ve had a different approach to those races if the championship situation had been different. While crashgate definitely didn’t help Massa’s chances, we don’t know who would’ve won the championship without it.

          1. A good point. Dennis said after Brazil that they shouldn’t have played it so conservatively, and it’s fair to say they wouldn’t have done had Hamilton been behind or had a much smaller lead going into the race.

          2. Pink Peril Alonso not happy with the win ? I think he was very happy, check the video:

        2. “Without it occurring he’d be champion. Irregardless of other mishaps.”

          Really? How convenient to just rewrite history by eliminating one event and then staunchly accepting that no other events could possibly have affected the championship… isolating one incident, erasing it from the mind, and then insisting that everything else would have been status quo.

          If one is to play woulda, coulda, shoulda, then one must accept, for example, that without the crash, and the safety car, and the pit error for Massa, perhaps FM’s or LH’s car would have had a tire issue, or some sort of reliability issue, or a racing incident with another car etc. etc. All the miriad of possibilities must be included once one decides to speculate based on rewriting history. And therefore no definitive conclusion can be achieved. Only pure speculation.

          1. Of course, but Massa was leading the race when Renault had Piquet crash. I think it’s fair to say that if the race had gone normally, he’d likely have ended up doing quite well. Maybe not a win, but hell, at least in the points. I don’t agree with your assertion that something else would have gone wrong, he did finish that race, so I think calling for a potential reliability concern is silly. As for the tyres, that wasn’t a problem in F1 at that time.

            Could he have crashed? Well, yeah. But I don’t think it was likely. He was on good form at that time.

            I think it’s very safe to say that he would have at least gotten the two points he would later need should the incident not have happened.

            I’m isolating this one incident because it’s the one that never should have happened. Every other screw up, well, that’s bad luck for him. But THIS. This was rigged. Could it have effected other things down the line? Sure.

            Make no mistake, it’s gone now. Lewis was champion. I feel sorry for Massa, but obviously he isn’t champion.

            But without this incident I think he probably would have been. Of course it’s speculation, but I think my speculation that he’d likely get 2 points is safer than your speculation that he would have crashed out.

          2. @ Mike – “I think it’s fair to say that if the race had gone normally, he’d (FM) likely have ended up doing quite well.”

            And you know this how? It is just an assumption, not fact. What of the fact that Ferrari actually messed up the fueling for Massa. Strikes me as “irregardless” of what Renault was up to, Massa had his own in-house issues.

        3. I believe that Massa gained 7 points over Hamilton through incredibly dubious stewarding calls. In Singapore he probably lost 10 points. But Hamilton probably lost 2 as well. Seems like it all evened out. Plus, wasn’t the issue with Massa that Ferrari messed up his stop? Sure, everything is a bit more frantic during a sudden safety car, but couldn’t that misfortune have befallen him regardless of crashgate, during his scheduled stop?

          1. There is a huge difference between points lost due to stewardin in 2008 and the points Massa lost due to Renaults foul play.

            Stewarding is part of the game and sometimes debatable. Never clear cut though, I would say that claiming Hamilton lost points due to questionable stewarding is an opinion and nothing more.

            Massa on the other hand was the victim of a deliberate malicious sceme by Renault. No room for debate, it was deliberate blatant cheating that has nothing to do with sports.

            Furthermore Massas incident with the fuel hose might never have occurred if the race had developed in a different way.

            I totally understand why this is still in Massas thoughts. Personally I’ve always been convinced Alonso knew everything, at least in the aftermath of what happened. But I don’t think he was among the instigators.

            It must have been tough on Massa working alongside Alonso considering this. Says a lot about Massas loyalty.

          2. I don’t think there is much of a difference at all.

            Massa on the other hand was the victim of a deliberate malicious sceme by Renault. No room for debate, it was deliberate blatant cheating that has nothing to do with sports.

            Furthermore Massas incident with the fuel hose might never have occurred if the race had developed in a different way.

            That’s just conjecture. It also could well have done. We could also say that Hamilton could well have challenged for the win had the safety car not happened, and that he only sat back and settled for 3rd because he was safely getting points over his rival. As I said, it depends how much of the cause was the pit stops being especially frantic. And Renault weren’t malicious. It was disgusting, but malice with Massa as the victim means they intentionally put Massa out of the race, which is not true.

            Saying that incorrect stewarding is reasonably part of the game but cheating isn’t seems like a double standard. Neither is part of the game.

          3. @kimiwillbeback As matt90 points out, it seems like you are implying FM was singled out to end up at the back of the pack by Renault’s actions that day, which of course is silly.

            As to your opinion about it being tough for FM working alongside FA…omg do you think someone had a gun to FM’s head? LdM admits they are a one rooster team…there was constant commentary about Ferrari being displeased with FM’s performance vs. FA and how it was hurting their WCC chances, and rumors had flown for at least the last 3 years about a replacement for FM, and so one would think that such a principled driver as FM would have sought a much better place to be at least after 2010, no? Yeah poor FM…forced to accept all those millions for all those years, wrestling with how awful it was to drive alongside the very fellow that ruined his WDC chances single-handedly. Too bad he couldn’t turn such strife and angst into actually giving FA a hard time on the track.

          4. @Kimiwillbeback, its not a crime to know about an event in the aftermath of what occurred. I’m sure Alonso did, he is a smart guy so I’m sure he figured out what happened. In fact, I remember commenting to Mr Pink at the time that he didn’t seem very happy with the win when he got out of the cockpit, a sure sign he knew something was up. But that is a long way from suggesting he either knew about it beforehand, or was complicit in the plan.

          5. Robbie

            I don`t imply that Massa was singled out at all. I`m just saying he ended up as the biggest victim of this incident. I`m sure Renaults intention was to benefit themselves, I`m sure they didn`t even consider targeting anybody else in the field. But I do believe Massa lost the 2008 WDC due to Renaults cheating.

            That doesn`t matter at all now though as Hamilton ended up as the 2008 WDC. He was also an innocent victim of this incident so there should be no shadow cast over his Championship, he fought for it and won it fair. What happened was out of his and McLarens control.

            Pink Peril

            That`s just what I`m saying, I`m sure Alonso knew what had happened in the aftermath of the incident. But I don`t think he was part of the instigation. He was allready in a hole due to events at McLaren and couldn`t afford to get involved in another scandal. But it is clear that the fact that Alonso probably knew what had happened after the race in 2008, Massa suspecting this, and the fact that Alonso didn`t report it will have made the cooperation between Alonso and Massa difficult. If Alonso had blown the whistle in 2008 the race would probably have been eliminated and Massa would have been the 2008 WDC. That`s tough.

            But I also understand why Alonso kept his mouth shut, he had been involved in enough controversity in 2007. Another incident might have destroyed his career, what team would have taken the chance on Alonso if he had blown the whistle. I don`t really think blowing the whistle at that point was an option open to Alonso. If something similar had happened today he had knowledge of he could have blown the whistle, and I sincerely hope he would have.

        4. Irregardless is not a word, just regardless will suffice ( self-appointed lexicon policeman)

          1. @mike I didn’t assert that without Piquet’s crash something else would have happened to FM…just that if one is to rewrite history then one has to be open to the concept that all kinds of things COULD have happened. Since FM did actually have a fuel hose mess up, one could easily assert that could obviously have happened and sent him to the back of the pack even without Piquet causing a safety car. I buy the concept that without the pit issue (but not the crash) the odds are greater that FM would have scored valuable points toward his championship run, but again, I don’t take it so far as to then close my mind to a hundred other issues, once rewritten in history, changing the Championship winner.

  8. I don’t understand why people are so protective towards Alonso.
    Of course he knew about it but he was not penalized because he told FIA everything and because he is Alonso.

    1. Show one single piece of evidence Alonso was in on the plan.

      1. @raceprouk
        There is none. But his strategy was entirely depending on a safetycar right at that moment.
        I don’t think he would have accepted that strategy had he not been assured that they would indeed get a safety car at the right moment.

        1. A fair point, but gambling on a safety car (regardless of who crashes) was a valid strategy, used by several drivers on numerous occasions. Add the at times narrow track and concrete walls, and it’s not unreasonable to think Alonso would take a gamble.

      2. He pitted too early without question.

    2. This. These people always act like Alonso is a saint or something, because of him Renault kicked out Trulli several races before the end of the season in 2004 because Alonso was no match for Trulli.

      1. I think this the COTD!

        “Alonso was no match for Trulli”


        1. Not entirely false. After Belgium 2004 Alonso’s manager aka team principle started to realize that Trulli mostly in front of Alonso but with a slower race pace, so Trulli had to move a side somehow. 2005 would have been exciting if Trulli vs Alonso.

      2. Yes, that’s why Jarno has all those race wins… And championships… And still has a drive… Erm. Yes.

        1. Do you mean 1 race win each between 2003-2004? But yes Alonso lost head-to-head qualifying.

    3. Yes, a double WDC cannot be a fraud or it will hummiliate F1 bussines, chew is how the bussiness works = integrity over dark swarm.

  9. I distinctly remember Alonso looking at Briatore in a very accusing way, saying nothing other than “it was the safety car”, in the post race podium weighing room. No smile, no handshake, just briatore awkwardly shuffling around. This looked suspicious at the time and after details came out made me think Alonso was indeed in the dark about the setup.

    The less people know about a conspiracy, the more chance it has to succeed. Unless Alonso himself came up with the idea, which I find rather unlikely, there is absolutely no reason to inform him of the plan as it would have made no difference from his point of view.

    1. @bs I’m not sure that this was correct, as Alonso’s fuel strategy didn’t make much sense in his situation without the crash plan so there may have been plenty of reason to inform him of it. So either Alonso goes along blindly with strategy without questioning it or, more likely I think, he knew about it before the race.

      1. Or it’s a long, tight, street circuit, where there’s more likely to be an incident that will require the Safety Car.

        1. @raceprouk
          Lets just do a bit of math.
          1.5 safety cars per race on average. (I am not sure of the statistics here)
          61 laps
          Chance of SC per lap: 1.5/61 = 0.025 = 2.5%
          Assuming his strategy would work if the SC turned up within 5 laps of his stops, then we get 2.5%*5 = 12.5% = 1 in 8.
          If his strategy could work with the SC within 10 laps we would of cause get a chance of it working out reaching 1 in 4.
          Possible. But only just.

    2. There were other drivers with similar strategies, all of whom also benefitted from Briatores’ idea.

    3. I think you were reading too much into that interaction, Briatore said something like great race, you got lucky and Alonso said something like, ” yeah, safety car” but there were no soap-opera moments from my recollection of a few years ago…

  10. I don’t understand people who defend Alonso in the Crashgate. Anyone who thinks he didn’t know is either extremely naive or an Alonso fan. I’m very far from being a Massa fan, but I completely understand him. The guy lost the championship thanks to that disgusting fixed race. The crashgate is the worst thing that happened in F1 and yet Alonso somehow emerged as a F1 hero. But then what you do will come back to you: karma. After crashgate Alonso was twice within reach of the elusive third title and lost. I don’t believe he’ll ever win another title again.

  11. Gotta laugh at how Singapore is always brought up when talking about how Massa ‘lost’ the championship, and not mentioning his diabolic drive at Silverstone when he was spinning in the wet all over the shop costimg in MANY points for the championship. And how he was gifted extremely valuble points at Spa when we was nowhere to be seen while Hamilton and Raikonnen showed him up in another mixed condition race.

    Massa didnt lose the championship in Singapore, he lost it because he wasnt good enough over the course of a full season and it only looked closer because the ‘referees’ made it so with their ‘post-match’ result fixing.

    1. Well said. Also don’t forget Melbourne and Malaysia where he spun all by himself and scored ZERO points. People should remember that they were the first 2 races without Traction control and he clearly could not adapt as well as others did. He lost the title in 2008 because he got beaten fair and square by superior talent.

    2. Jack (@jackisthestig)
      9th January 2014, 21:18

      Too right, neither Massa or Hamilton had an absolutely heroic season in 2008. I had Kubica down as driver of the season, worth remembering he was well in contention for the championship when the team focussed all their resources on the disastrous 2009 car.

      1. Too true, what a loss to the sport! Kubica out-drove everyone that year and was the inspiration for Bernie’s ill-conceived medals system because he was leading the championship in a car not capable of winning a race, an amazing achievement… His victory at Canada a year after his massive wipeout will always make me wish and hope RK can come back!

  12. Massa added the FIA should have “cancelled” the result of the after once the truth came to light in September 2009.

    I don’t think it’s a clever idea to change championship results almost a year after its end. There’s a good reason why FIA are not allowed to do that. Let’s assume FIA have just found out that Vettel broke some rules in 2012 and declare Alonso the 2012 world champion now. That might sound halfway acceptable but where does it end? Should FIA also declare Lauda the 1976 world champion in 2014 if it suddenly turns out that McLaren had an illegal car during that year?

    1. @girts well didn’t Verstappen say the car Schumacher drove in 1994 was illegal? The results still stand…

      1. @craig-o

        Verstappen said he “believed” Schumachers car was illegal because he always beat him in friendly karting races and couldn’t believe Schumacher was so much faster in an F1 car. Not exactly substantial evidence.

    2. Its what the Tour de France did with doping …

      Not to say that I really think it should be changed at all. That would be completely unfair to Hamilton, because he would suddenly have less points without having had the chance to react to that and still win the WDC. If anything McLaren and Hamilton lost out because they were trying to play it too conservative and keep the lead as it was, they would have certainly raced differently without those points.

  13. Michael Brown (@)
    9th January 2014, 13:52

    Shots fired

  14. I don’t look at Singapore as to where Massa lost the championship, I look at Australia, Malaysia and Silverstone for reasons as to why Massa lost the championship.

    Because it only came to light after the 2008 season had finished, I don’t see why the race should be voided or Alonso be disqualified from the race results. Yes the win may have been tainted but so was Hockenheim, and wins for other drivers (Malaysia 2013, Austria 2002). Hamilton was the 2008 champion, and he deserved it. I don’t feel he was the best driver that season, Kubica was, but he was a worthy champion, same as what Massa would have been, had he scored more points than Hamilton.

    1. The race was fixed and unfortunately for HAM and MAS the championship was too close to make it irrelevant.
      As you say you can bring up either one of these events and who knows maybe they would have still lost Singapore – but it doesn’t negate the fact that Singapore was an irregular race and put an asterisk next to the whole championship.
      07 was even worse but we are talking less about it since RAI won. If HAM or ALO would have taken the title it would be a different story.

    2. @craig-o Malaysia 2013 was the exact opposite of Germany 2010, it doesn’t bear comparison at all.

      1. Perhaps Malaysia was a bad example in terms of the race victory, but Hamilton definitely wasn’t happy with 3rd!

        1. @craig-o I was referring to Vettel-Webber, not Hamilton-Rosberg, in that race.

    3. To be honest and somewhat nit-picky, Massa actually lost the championship at the last corner of Brasil after he won the race and Hamilton overtook Glock on bad tyres in the wet… Just sayin’…

  15. He is right, of course Alonso knew, there is no doubt about that. You have to be stupid or naive to think otherwise. And yes I agree the race results should have been cancelled once the revelations came to light. It indeed was a fixed result. I understand how hugely unpopular that would have been, but it was the right and just thing to do. Why Felipe is bringing this up now, now that I don’t know!

    1. The result was fixed and the win should have been voided from Alonso’s records when this event came to light a year later. Other results should have remained the same with no adjustment to points for Singapore 2008. No one can prove that Alonso was ‘in’ on the fix and no solid evidence has some to light.

      And for mk below, if Glock had changed tires he wouldn’t have been a factor on the last lap. Remaining on dry tires was why he was passed, no conspiracy there.

      1. The irony is Glock tried to come into the pits to change tyres a lap earlier but found the pit lane blocked by Massa’s supporters about to celebrate his ‘championship’.

  16. I would also look at the toyota last lap last race last corner more sniff of rodent on that one for me

    1. Are you for real?

    2. It was over 5 years and the conspiracy theorists are still at large.
      The evidence against your belief is so overwhelming it is a non-argument.

    3. Come on! Have you watched the in-car footage, or are you just willingly blind? Glock had trouble keeping it on the road, much less racing for position…

  17. “For sure, I will discuss it with him,” said Massa of Symonds, “but I am sure he is not the most important guy in what happened”.

    Sounds like a good way to start out with a new team.

    1. Sounds like a good way to start out with a new team.

      No joke. Dear Felipe, one would think the focus for the 2014 season for you and Mr. Symonds is to make the Williams go faster and be glad you both still have jobs in F1.

  18. Get on with your life Felipe. Look forward to driving a championship winning car again, instead of looking for answers from a teammate who allegedly, and indirectly, sabotaged a championship that you could have won on your own merit

  19. Of course he did. I completely fail to see how Freddy didn’t know about a plot to help him with the race.

    1. But you’ll never be satisfied. When Piquet, Symonds, Briatore and a court came out and said Alonso had no knowledge of the incident you conveniently don’t believe them. You hold no grudge against anyone else involved in the team, the race engineers for example, but believe Fernando must have known. Why must he have known? You are using this purely as a way to belittle Alonso in a petty manner because you think it makes your favourite driver look better. If it’s not this, its McLaren 2007 or anything negative that Alonso says about Ferrari, Vettel or Raikkonen. Face the facts and move on.

      1. Or your sarcasm detector has broken?

      2. @rbalonso No, I genuinely believe he knew. He had to have known. You don’t come up with a plan like that without telling the guy who was going to benefit from it. it wasn’t like a surprise birthday party. And it’s not about favourite drivers, I don’t have any favourite drivers. I have nothing against Alonso and recognise him as an incredible talent behind the wheel of a race car.

        But I think he must have known.

        1. @ajokay. I think we’ll have to agree to differ here. From my point of view I think that Renault would have tried to limit the number of people in the know. If they told Alonso surely they/he would ensure his engineers knew so they could maximise the result. This would have spread to everyone in the team over time. By only telling Piquet then everyone writes it off as genuine luck. I think if Alonso knew it would have been clear on the podium, to me he was genuinely pleased and believed that day he was lucky.

  20. Personally I think FM comes across here as petty and vindictive.

    Firstly, he has no evidence and only suspicions, so it seems ridiculous to bring this up this long after the fact. But what, FM…only now that you don’t HAVE to be buddies with FA you have the guts to reveal your unfounded suspicions? You should have channeled that underlying anger after mid-2010.

    Secondly, it is ridiculous to play woulda, coulda, shoulda when in fact it was a team pit error that caused FM to end up at the back of the pack, not the safety car. So many things can happen and you can’t just make claims in hindsight and assume that if one thing didn’t happen etc etc, because then you can’t assume everything else in the race would have happened just the same as it did. It’s always so convenient for people to change the outcome in hindsight to suit themselves or their argument, without acknowledging then that hundreds of other variables could also have happened if the one thing changed for you.

    Thirdly, it didn’t take for FM to join Symonds on a team for him to be able to talk to him about Singapore 08, so again, why throw FA under the bus now? Just because Ferrari hired him as the team’s rooster and you (FM) decided to live with that reality particularly from mid-2010 through 2013?

    I’m quite unimpressed with FM right now.

    1. Wanted to say the same.
      Too hypocritical of Massa to accept Hockenheim and say Alonso was at fault for his 2008 defeat. It was a fuelling error which cost Felipe mostly anyway, not the Crash.
      On the whole, Felipe had way too many spins in 2008 while Lewis drove a relatively faultless season to his name, same as Kubica

  21. Massa is a joke, firstly when he is fighting for his seat to stay on for 2014 he says “alonso is better then michael schumacher”, totally kissing butt, now that he was kicked to the curb he comes out and says this, last I remember crash gate happened 6 years ago, did it take you that long massa to come up with this pointless comment now?
    guess we’ll have to hear what he thinks of williams only AFTER he leaves the team.

  22. well its official, I like Massa now as much as I like Maldonado…

  23. While I think Massa’s right, there’s something that rings a bit false when he states that Alonso knew of the plan, but then seems to shrug off the fact that one of the main individuals involved in the scandal – Pat Symonds – is part of his new team.

    If he’s bringing up old grudges then that’s fine. He has every right to still feel aggrieved, on the balance of probability that race cost him a World Championship. But to point the finger at an individual that has never been officially implicated in the controversy, then turn around and seemingly excuse one of the men who orchestrated it, leaves me with a bad taste.

    1. Very well said, @colossal-squid .

  24. As an Alonso fan I have reviewed this race many times. I am still not convinced Alonso had reason to question his qualifying fuel load given that the car showed pace on Friday and had a mechanical problem in qualifying. Also, given the pace of the car in the race (pit stop was lap 12 iirc) and the genuine win in Fuji in the next round confirm Alonso still had a lot of work to do. In the post-race podium room Alonso sincerely says to Briatore, ‘lucky with the safety car’. That to me is irrefutable evidence that he knew nothing about it because if he was guilty he wouldn’t openly say something like that directly after the race.

    In terms of Massa’s 2008 campaign, one result is meaningless. After very poor performances at the start of the season there were calls for Alonso to replace him immediately. At Monaco Hamilton hit the wall and won the race due to being on the right tyres after the safety car. That was a stroke of luck against Massa. In Britain he was poor and in Hungary he retired from the lead with 3 to go. He was gifted the Belgian GP, although I stand by that decision. In Signapore he had the fuel nozzle problem meaning that in a normal race he would have scored no points and in Japan he had his chief rival smash into him on the first lap.

    Overall, I feel Massa uses Signapore as a way to say that he would have won the title without race fixing, which obviously every sport fan agrees with in principle. However, viewing the season as a whole and given how many catastrophic driving errors from Hamilton there were leads me to believe the result we saw in 2008 was more than justified. Bringing it up 5 years later just seems bitter to me.

    1. @rbalonso

      I am still not convinced Alonso had reason to question his qualifying fuel load given that the car showed pace on Friday and had a mechanical problem in qualifying.

      Plus pitting before everyone else was a viable tactic back then anyway, considering that it also cycled Rosberg through the field, and considering what happened in Germany with Piquet. Also the chances of a safety car are always high in Singapore.

      1. David not Coulthard (@)
        10th January 2014, 15:06

        Also the chances of a safety car are always high in Singapore.

        Which probably doesn’;t count as it was the first race there:)

        I can’t argue with your other points, though.

        1. If only there were other street circuits, like Monaco and Valencia, to base safety car likelihood on :P

  25. Of course he knew.

    1. Evidence?

      1. The court of public opinion demands no evidence of that which could never actually be proven in the first place… This is Opinionville my friend, not Factland.

  26. Massa was once a very talented driver whose career was very unfortunately impaired by a freak accident. And that is deserving of sympathy. But in his relationship with Ferrari and Alonso he’s only grown a pair when it doesn’t matter anymore and piping up now feels only pathetic.

    1. the accident didnt change a thing. he was beating or matching alonzo in the 1st half of 2010 and ultimatly the team destroyed him mentally at hockenhime. then the 2 year lull enebilty happned until he hit the bottom and got 2 podiums at end of 2012. in 2013 massas pace has matched alonzo all season but no conistancey and alonsos amazing race craft has made him look worse than he is, due do tyre failures and driver errors etc.

      1. then the 2 year lull enebilty happned until he hit the bottom and got 2 podiums at end of 2012

        I’m glad you cleared that up – I would have been confused otherwise.

  27. “and in Japan he had his chief rival smash into him on the first lap.”

    Wow, way to go with rewriting history. Massa got his ar $e handed to him and he proceeded to mow Hamilton right away. It was even worse than what schumi did in Jerez 97.

    1. I was initially referring to the first corner with Hamilton running wide pushing raikkonen and massa off. Contact on lap 2 was entirely massa’s fault true. But either way the point is that it was not only Singapore that cost massa points that year and it is unfair to pick one race over the year.

      1. Yes, you are right. But saying Hamilton smashed into him isn’t fair at all since it didn’t happen. Maybe I’m being too nitpicky. But he DID force kimi and felipe wide, that’s the truth. Anyway, I think felipe lost the title when he failed to score in aus, malaysia and silverstone, all from poor driving which is his fault and his alone.

  28. Sour grapes for sure. Come on Felipe, after 5 years isn’t it time to move on? Yes it sucked, but living in the past won’t get you anywhere.

  29. I think Massa has done a complete transfer of the blame. In a long struggle with himself, it seems he found it too hard to accept that the blame lies on himself and his team (for letting him out with the fuel hose still attached), that he had to find an alternative that would be make it seem as if someone took the title away from him by the means of some evil, unfair scheme.
    In his mind now, it’s as if Alonso came and switched his pit-stop lights prematurely in order to screw him. He is now well into the thinking that Flavio and Pat didn’t come up with the scheme to try and save their jobs and most likely Renault’s F1 program, but that it was Alonso who came up with it, with one, and one only goal of ruining Massa’s race.
    He, and unfortunately many “journalists” and “fans” have come to think of the whole thing as the only reason why Massa lost the title. Not that he spun from 4th at the first corner in Australia, or that Ferrari engine blew up later in the race, not that he spun out of sure 2nd and possible 1st place in Malaysia. His mistake in Monaco cost him few points more. His race in Silverstone was horrible. His race in Canada was lucky in a way, since Hamilton retired, but Ferrari still made a mess of it. In Hungary it was an engine again. In Italy he was nowhere, in Japan he was again hitting things and getting unnecessary penalties and spins.

    And all of this before we even come to the more important aspect of this statement. How can you go around, publicly accusing someone of something serious, for which you have zero evidence and for which they were already found not guilty? And he keeps doing it. Wouldn’t it be more dignifying to simply decline answering questions on that topic?

    1. “And all of this before we even come to the more important aspect of this statement. How can you go around, publicly accusing someone of something serious, for which you have zero evidence…”

      Bitterness on part of a rejected human can be very powerful and make you do stupid/illogical things. The more important question is how come a site, which consider itself being a respectable F1 site, chooses to (once again) actually publish such crap.

      PS. Ever thought of working in the stock market? If not you should – your logical reasoning would make you good cash, among the herds of illogical humans!

  30. I said it before and I’ll say it again. People are so caught up in Alonso winning that they completely fail to step back and comprehend the whole thing. They are unable to see beyond one meaningless benefit to a driver, because they’re all focused on punishing or rewarding drivers, based on their completely biased and emotional preferences, which is ok for a simple cheering of one driver over another, but not in this case.

    To suggest that Alonso is a main benefactor, implies that this whole thing was made in order to gain him a single race win, in a season where he wasn’t even in a championship fight. So, on a face of it, the only thing Alonso could gain was one sole victory, without any benefit for himself, except the statistics in his total race wins tally. Suggesting that he would do all this for just one win that doesn’t help his championship one bit, is completely illogical.

    You should actually try to see who could benefit from Alonso’s (or Renault’s) win, and/or who would benefit from some extra points.

    Apparently, Alonso really didn’t have much benefit from gaining few extra points, and that one win in itself really doesn’t mean much when you are not fighting for the championship.

    The main beneficiary was undoubtedly Hamilton and McLaren, but that’s a bit too far-fetched and relies on knowing exactly how screwed Massa would be in comparison to Hamilton, since they’ve both lost out in the safety car period. So I think, it’s safe to discard them from any planning, even though they have, due to the long set of circumstances, benefit in the end more than anyone else.

    Next you got Ferrari who has the most to lose by losing a P1, since they are in the championship hunt and have all to lose and nothing to gain with safety car. Again, suggesting that Renault or Alonso would simply want to screw Ferrari and Massa for some reason is a bit too far-fetched too.

    So now that the championship points themselves are out of the question, think about the win itself.
    Who has a motive here?

    A win in a first night race, where you don’t have much to gain from points, is a matter of prestige. That counts more towards sponsors’ commitments, sponsorship packages, budget approvals and similar. That’s why I think it was done with a view of the Renault’s long term future. Of course, in the long run it backfired spectacularly, but still, I don’t see any other possible beneficiary than Renault F1 programme, or perhaps Flavio’s or Junior’s position in a team. Junior was just dreadful as a driver, while Flavio on the other hand needed probably needed to start getting some results in order to secure funding and survival of the F1 programme. Many won’t remember, but there was a constant talk about Renault withdrawing from F1 through all this time, even starting back when they were winning in 2006.

    1. Well said to both your posts.

  31. Felipe, we need to talk. The Singapore scandal happened more than five years ago, and while we all appreciate your desire to have the record set straight, eventually you reach a point of diminishing returns.

  32. This makes me wonder what really has been the spirit inside Ferrari during these 4 years.

    1. Carlos Furtado das Neves
      9th January 2014, 21:36

      Ok Felipe. Fernando is faster than you. Can you confirm that you understood that message?
      Ok mate, good lad. Just stay with mim now. Sorry.
      And very, very, very magnanimous. You don’t have any idea what that word means, so I’ll explane it to you later.

      And then they treat the guy as if he was stupid! Good job, mate. Good job!

      1. The way you put it sounds like he was forced to drive for Ferrari for so many consecutive years? Fernando, Kimi, Lewis… They would have left the team in one year time, if that would be their case.

  33. Congrats! Massa’s just been elected Tr*ll Of The Day!

  34. Who cares now?

  35. Michael Brown (@)
    9th January 2014, 19:30

    I do find it odd that Alonso didn’t know about Renault’s intentions. Did he even question the team’s choice for their fuel strategy.

    However, there simply is no evidence to support that. And if Alonso were to be found guilty, what would they do? Declassify him from the result? Hamilton would then win the title with slightly more points. Massa would still score zero

  36. Of course he knew. HE IS A CHEAT AND HE WILL ALWAYS BE ONE. He was involved in McLaren Spygate that cost them 100mil after he left them. That’s why I will NEVER support him.

    1. @prelvu I don’t think that’s fair. Mike Coughlan and Nigel Stephney were the ones to blame there. Alonso arriving at a new team would have known as much as Hamilton and De La Rosa about it. Blackmailing the team is obviously regrettable but probably due to his status in the team being downgraded. If McLaren had their time again they would probably back Alonso more given what happened. You are entitled to your opinion but to infer he is a cheat is simply not true.

      1. @rbalonso

        The fact Alonso happily used the info he got and talked about in depth with De La Rosa shows he’s not shy of getting any advantage. Even an unfair one because using technical data from a competitor without their knowledge is an unfair advantage.

        1. If it were to be accepted that McLaren used Ferrari’s technical data in the 2007 car – which has not been proven – then surely Hamilton benefitted as much as Alonso? Both of them were in the title hunt right to the end so it seems a bit of a stretch to only cast aspersions against Alonso. Whilst I agree it was not particularly sporting of Alonso to use the data knowing where it came from, there was never any suggestion he was complicit in the data being at McLaren in the first place. And thinking back to the ‘penalty’ levied by the FIA – it was against the team itself and neither driver was penalised, presumably because the driver is at the mercy of his team as to what car is produced that year and has little input into it, bar the individual set up. So it’s a long bow to try & link what happened at McLaren in 2007 to somehow Alonso being a ‘cheat’. Certainly the term ‘attempted blackmailer’, if used in connection with Alonso, would have some legs to it although we don’t know exactly what went on between him & Dennis that year, and I think it would be fair to say there is most likely blame on both sides.

          1. Both of them were in the title hunt right to the end so it seems a bit of a stretch to only cast aspersions against Alonso.

            Hamilton did not have any awareness of the Ferrari data, Alonso did.

  37. The nickname “Teflonso” is perfect. Nothing sticks…not the crash-gate, nor the spy-gate, not the team orders…I don’t know…I’m fed up of Alonso. He is probably the best driver nowadays (if not in the top 3) but I’m tired of listening he should have more championships. The fault is always in the car, or in the team-mate….He really thinks he is perfect. He should review a couple of 2013 races….Malaysia, Monaco…

  38. I really hope to see Kimi outscoring Teflonso in the same car.

  39. Well, we have a saying around here: “The stupid throws a stone into the lake, a hundred wise man jump in to get it out”

  40. One thing for sure, Massa is a lot more likely to know if Alsono was in on it or not than anyone guessing in the comments here.

    1. And yet, FM is just speculating too, and in fact doesn’t know the truth, is only speculating, and only claims he will try to get an answer out of Symonds, like that will be forthcoming…not!

  41. IIRC Massa accused Alonso of the race being fixed and of knowing about it immediately the race ended. So this isn’t something new that he has just raised now, he is just voicing a long held suspicion. Those two have a long history of rankling at each other dating back to before Alonso joined Ferrari, spats at which Alonso generally tended to come out on top of so it is not surprising Massa no longer feels the need to keep the gloves on as it were. However, IMO he would have been better off to be gracious when asked about it by the journalist and deflect the question. Whatever it is he thinks he knows is surely only speculation and opinion on his part and airing those now only diminishes his standing.

  42. It was a horrible day for F1, but… what Renault did was use one car to influence the outcome of the race in the favour of the other.

    Yes they got one car to crash. But is it really that different to using one car to slow down a rival/the pack while the other streaks off into the distance? They both affect the race outcome, both hinder others, benefit the team leader.

    Take away the outrage and the fact it REALLY helped Alonso, and it was just team orders. It was no more ‘fixed’ than any race involving a ‘Fernando is faster than you’ moment.

    1. Because forcing a driver to crash puts himself, the fans, the marshals and the other drivers at risk far more than simply holding someone up

  43. Question – Is Massa being a little naive thinking that Symonds will actually tell him anything especially after this interview? Answer – Yes!

    However I’m actually with Massa on this one. I think Alonso did know everything. Alonso destroyed his reputation and credibility ever since the McLaren issue.

  44. Just have one thing to say to Massa. Good Luck working with the guy who planned all this :)

  45. The only point, as I see it, from this “news” is that MAS is still really bitter that he lost the 2008 title. I suppose the fact that he was completely and utterly destroyed by ALO for four consecutive seasons, driving the same car, does not make him less bitter either.
    He makes a random accusation without having any evidence to back it up with (apart from obviously a big load of bitterness), and certain media channels thinks “Wow, What a scoop!”. Are you running out of ideas to discredit ALO, Keith? Come on, this is old “news” – you can do better than this!

    1. @quads
      Unfair to criticize Keith. This is what was in the motorsports news these past days, that’s all.
      We learned what type of sportsman Alonso was in 2007. His ongoing conduct and head games confirms it.

    2. You’re talking about the same Keith that rated Alonso the second best driver in 2013?

      1. Unless there are two different Keith running the site, the answer to your question is yes. What is your point?
        The rating of ALO you are referring to, was not determined by the editor – it was determined by ALOs public achievements on the track. It is trivial and could not possibly have been different/worse as the final standings table is very clear in that regard – 2nd place despite having at best 3rd fastest package in majority of the races.

        1. You do know all the Alonso comments in the article came from Massa right?

  46. Hey Felipe here is a mystery you don’t need to ask Pat to confirm….Alonso > massa.

  47. Andrew Simmons
    10th January 2014, 17:36

    Felipe can moan about the crash all he wants. I dont recall Piquet’s crash making Ferrari let the car go out of the box with the fuel pipe still attached. I dont remember the crash making the team not run after him straight away to remove the fuel hose.

    Funnily enough, I dont remember Piquet’s crash causing Massa to spin out of the lead in malaysia. I dont remember Piquet’s crashing making Massa hit Coulthard not once, but TWICE in Australia. I dont remember Piquet’s crash causing Massa to spin lewis in Japan or misfueling in Canada or not fighting lewis in Germany.

    Funnily enough, I also dont remember Piquet’s crash causing lewis to get a penalty for blocking Heidfeld in Malaysia, stalling on the grid and hitting Alonso twice in Bahrain, crash into Kimi in Canada, Hamilton a penalty on the grid for France and then corner cutting during the race or overtaking kimi illegally.

    All what Lewis went through, and he still won. Massa can throw around Singapore all he wants, fact is, Massa threw it away at the start.

    1. Alejandro F. Martinez
      11th January 2014, 23:14

      Right on the spot.

  48. Alejandro F. Martinez
    11th January 2014, 23:12

    Mr Massa has been a useless driver for Ferrari since 2009. First through his unfortunate accident, but for the last 3 seasons he has not helped the team either by missdriving, involving himself in lousy situations with other drivers and most importantly, getting in the way of Alonso whenever he can; he impeded him from advancing and competing with the frontrunners in several ocations. He was also a lousy partner to Schumacher so it is a consistent attitude. Now he comes with these declarations while he only received nice words from Alonso in his departure which not only was expected, but long overdue. It is the problem Massa: whenever things don’t go his way he complains as if someone robbed him instead of looking in the mirror and looking what he did wrong.

  49. Alonso absolutely knew of the plan, and willingly participated in it. The only thing he did not do was ever admit to it. Slimy thing to do, of course …… but we are talking about Fernando after all.

  50. This was nothing, wait until double points are in and make a single race potentially very lucrative.

Comments are closed.