Fernando Alonso, McLaren, Circuit de Catalunya, 2015

Alonso’s crash not caused by car fault – McLaren

2015 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Fernando Alonso, McLaren, Circuit de Catalunya, 2015McLaren has asserted that Fernando Alonso’s crash during yesterday’s test session at the Circuit de Catalunya was not caused by a car failure.

Alonso suffered a “significant lateral impact” in the crash and remains in hospital. The team is yet to determine whether he will be able to participate in the next four-day test at the track which begins on Thursday.

According to McLaren Alonso ran onto the artificial grass which lines the outside of turn three before skidding into the wall on the inside of the corner. The team believe a strong gust of wind contributed to the crash, and noted that Toro Rosso driver Carlos Sainz Jnr also crashed during the same test because of the windy conditions.

After analysing Alonso’s car McLaren specifically denied “erroneous rumours” claiming their driver had suffered an electric shock or been rendered unconscious prior to hitting the wall.

“Our data clearly shows that he was downshifting while applying full brake pressure right up to the moment of the first impact,” said the team in a statement, “something that clearly would not have been possible had he been unconscious at the time.”

Statement from McLaren

We are pleased to confirm that, having been involved in an on-track incident at the Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya (Spain) on February 22nd, Fernando Alonso is making a solid recovery in hospital, and is chatting to family, friends and hospital staff.

From the scene of the incident he was driven to the circuit’s medical centre, where he was given first aid and, as per normal procedures, was sedated in preparation for an airlift to hospital.

In hospital a thorough and complete analysis of his condition was performed, involving CT scans and MRI scans, all of which were completely normal.

In order to provide the privacy and tranquillity required to facilitate a peaceful recuperation, he is being kept in hospital for further observation, and to recover from the effects of the medication that successfully managed his routine sedation yesterday.

We intend to give him every opportunity to make a rapid and complete recovery, and will evaluate in due course whether or not he will participate in the next Barcelona test.

Over the past 24 hours, we have been carrying out a detailed analysis of the damage to Fernando’s car, and its associated telemetry data, in order fully to understand the cause, or causes, of his accident. Even at this early stage, we have been able to reach some firm conclusions.

His car ran wide at the entry to turn three – which is a fast uphill right-hander – allowing it to run onto the Astroturf that lines the outside of the track. A consequent loss of traction caused a degree of instability, spitting it back towards the inside of the circuit, where it regained traction and struck the wall side-on.

Our findings indicate that the accident was caused by the unpredictably gusty winds at that part of the circuit at that time, and which had affected other drivers similarly (e.g. Carlos Sainz Jnr).

We can categorically state that there is no evidence that indicates that Fernando’s car suffered mechanical failure of any kind. We can also confirm that absolutely no loss of aerodynamic pressure was recorded, which fact indicates that the car did not suffer any aerodynamic loss, despite the fact that it was subjected to a significant level of g-force. Finally, we can also disclose that no electrical discharge or irregularity of any kind occurred in the car’s ERS system, either before, during or after the incident.

That last point refutes the erroneous rumours that have spread recently to the effect that Fernando was rendered unconscious by an electrical fault. That is simply not true. Our data clearly shows that he was downshifting while applying full brake pressure right up to the moment of the first impact – something that clearly would not have been possible had he been unconscious at the time.

Our data also confirms that Fernando’s car struck the inside concrete wall, first with its front-right wheel and then with its rear-right. It was a significant lateral impact, resulting in damage to the front upright and axle.

After the initial impact, the car slid down the wall for about 15 seconds before coming to a halt. All four wheels remained attached to the car, but no damage was sustained by the bodywork or crash structure between the front and rear wheels.

We wish Fernando a very speedy recovery. As and when we have further updates to share, we will of course do so.

2015 F1 season

Browse all 2015 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.

107 comments on “Alonso’s crash not caused by car fault – McLaren”

  1. So just a normal crash then really, the circumstances of which happened to cause a bit of a blow to Alonso’s head. No electrocution, nothing sinister.

    I’m glad we can put the whole thing to bed now and move on, wishing Alonso a speedy recovery of course.

    1. @mazdachris indeed, hopefully people can take off their tin foil hats now, although somehow I doubt that will happen.

    2. No electrocution indeed, as electrocution is a cause of death. (Everyone is allotted one english language pet peeve, right?)

      1. Indeed, the use of the phrase was deliberate :)

      2. Depends on the dictionary. It can also be “injured by electric shock”.

        Of course, the etymology is from “execute”, but that hardly matters, or most of the words we use today would be wrong.

        1. The irony is that’s literally the most insanely spot on thing I’ve laid my eyes upon.

        2. Ain’t that the truf.
          I find it funny, that in testing they will say “yeah it was me, I goofed.” In the race, it’s never their fault.

      3. @vanguardtruth – Thanks. I learned something from that. No longer shall I take “electrocution” lightly. Of course computer programs get executed (with electricity, even) all the time and seem none the worse for it.

        1. @tribaltalker Got to get an “unless it’s Windows” quip in, surely?

    3. The main reason people are coming up with wild theories is because they sent Alonso to stay in a hospital overnight, a bit over the top if the crash was as small as Vettel alluded to. This was then linked to the lack of information and people suggested it was more serious. Perhaps it’s just the FIA being desperate not to repeat the Bianchi disaster.

      1. I think the accident was a bit more significant, from a g-force perspective, than it probably appeared from the outside. The way the car hit the wall would have meant that none of the deformable structures came into play, transferring all the energy directly through the chassis. A high-G impact, even at low speed, will set off the alarms in the car, especially if the driver is dazed or knocked out for a short period. In that case, sending the driver to hospital for further checks is absolutely the right thing to do, and is standard procedure in F1. A lot of brain injuries don’t manifest themselves immediately. Think back to Schumacher, who was reportedly conscious after the Skiing accident, before lapsing into a coma later on. As a Rugby Union fan, let me tell you that it’s extremely comforting to see the FIA take head injuries so seriously, even if it is to the point of being overly cautious. Too many people have died over the years, or suffered irreversible brain damage, because seemingly small blows to the head haven’t been treated seriously at the time.

        1. +1… Any kind of injury to the head has to be taken seriously and the FIA has done the absolute right thing here…. It’s better to err on the side of caution than to be sorry afterwards…
          Very pleased to hear that he’s recovering well… There was a picture of him in ESPN giving thumps up from his hospital bed

          1. Mark Donohue seemed lightly injured in his accident after a tire failure, he was okay and up and around until the next day, had a headache, went to hospital, then died from brain trauma, possibly from hitting a fence post. Way better to check.

        2. Quite shocking that he suffered such an injury in a seemingly small accident, especially given all the protective shrouding around the cockpit. I guess the lack of damage to the car means Alonso took the brunt of the impact rather than the suspension components and the sidepod crash structures.

          1. @jackisthestig While it may seem like only a small accident, 150kph is still well over 90mph. It seems slow by F1 standards, but there are still pretty big forces at work. Let’s face it, most people who slam into a concrete wall in their car at over 90mph would get far worse than a concussion. We just get used to seeing drivers obliterate their cars in huge spectacular accidents at 250kph, and then hop out like it was nothing. Sometimes the less spectacular looking accidents and up worse.

          2. 150 kph against a concrete wall is often absolutely fatal. He is fine, and it was not a small one.

        3. Exactly, so is the quoted speed of 90mph roughly, the velocity at which the car hit the wall perpendicular to it, or the velocity in the forward direction? I worded that horribly, but it’s quite different having a velocity of 90mph straight into the wall and having a much lower velocity into the wall and your forward component being 90mph.

      2. The main reason people are coming up with wild theories is because they are armchair racers/engineers, with frustrated dreams of being race-car drivers and too much time on their hands, who think themselves experts when in fact they know next to nothing and have no knowledge of the facts (either because they are not readily available or simply cannot be known). They should stick to being spectators, in the true sense of the word, and leave the theorizing alone.

    4. Exactly, people that immediately said he was electrocuted clearly have no idea how electric systems (or circuits for that matter) work, bottom line is if you’re not an engineer and don’t have a clue of even the basics of a hybrid system, keep your mouth shut.

      1. @mantresx it is still technically possible for a driver to be electrocuted while driving. And having been electrocuted myself once, I can understand people that have brought it on the table. I found it unlikely, but not impossible.

    5. In what normal crash the car keeps sliding against the wall for “about 15 seconds” as the statement says? That seems to me as the driver was uncoscious at some moment. I accept the statement from Mclaren, I just think we’re not being told the whole truth…

    6. Oh, well because the official press release say’s that is all there is, it must be that way. I suppose they would not have any reason to tell us otherwise. Really? When has anyone in F1 said what they meant and meant what they said?? In the minimum. F1 needs to look at these side load accidents without deform-able structures to absorb energy and a layer of barrier protection on the inside of corners. This isn’t the first time a car has regained traction and shot back onto the track and into the opposite barriers that are meant to separate people and equipment ie. safety workers/ marshals from the race-track rather than protect drivers and car from a crash.

    7. I wonder how long has it been Alonso crashing ?

  2. Wow, even the greats are fallible. Please come back soon Fernando!

  3. I think what must have happened is that Fernando got distracted looking at the steering wheel or somewhere else and went off track a little bit but then overcorrected and lost the car, maybe similar to Maldonado spinning in China when he was changing settings on the wheel.

    1. Pretty clearly he was daydreaming about how much faster he would be if he had stayed at Ferrari, and strayed off the road, perhaps looking in his mirrors at Vettel.

      1. Highly improbable theory. Given how easy it was for him to completely and thouroughly destroy RAI, driving the same (yet again horrible FIAT) car, I think he would be rather boored doing the same all over again…even if the FIAT happened to be faster this time around.
        VET? Actually he had just ovetaken him at that lap. And besides, given that even rookiesh driver Ricciardo did beat him, easily, driving the same car, few drivers would feel intimidated in any way by seeing VET in the back mirror……Well, maybe RAI would I suppose.

        1. Ohhhhhkay

        2. @ quattro…No, I must agree with geargrinder. The telemetry data clearly showed Alonso to be daydreaming about Ferrari.

          1. +1 Spot on assessment of the telemetry. There was an enormous spike in nostalgia right as he approached turn 3. The rest, as they say, is history.

      2. Just brainless people make jokes about an accident.

    2. Wasn’t it at Spa too? :-)

      1. @spoutnik

        Pick any track mate :)

  4. I think sadly this now points to Alonso suffering some kind of a blackout due to exhaustion, or worse still, a mild stroke in the car.

    1. So while he was blacked out and having a stroke, he was somehow also miraculously steering, braking, and shifting down gears?

      1. Just to be clear, you are explicitly stating that it is 100% impossible for someone with voltage going through their body or under conditions of a stroke to smash the brakes/accelerator pedal during the event? Forgive me for not taking a teams calculated PR statement as fact but hyperextension of muscles due to voltage/stroke conditions has to be more common than not and McLaren holding their telemetry up as evidence does not actually mean Alonso was willfully giving the car that input. The lawyers have had their say however, the NDA’s have been signed (maybe some money dished out as well) so we’ll never know the truth. Shady F1 moguls are nothing new and are actually one of the biggest reasons I love F1, fans however that take shady teams, lawyer written PR statements as fact however, make me pretty nervous.

        1. I am saying that it’s impossible for a man who is unconscious to simultaneously steer, brake, and shift gears while attempting to avoid a crash yes. That is exactly what I am saying.

          Honestly, what is with people like you? What makes a (presumably) sane and competent person give themselves over so complete to such complete and utter tinfoil hattery? I just feel a bit sorry for you to be honest, that you live in this bizarre fantasy world of lies and conspiracies. Alonso had a crash and now he’s in hospital with a concussion. It’s hardly the plot of the latest Dan Brown novel is it.

          Of course, I won’t attempt to convince you otherwise, as such high level concepts like ‘reason’ and ‘logic’ seem to be completely beyond your grasp.

          1. Someone having a stroke could be capable of giving input to the car. I think we can both agree on this. I never suggested he was passed out, that was someone else and yourself. I was pretty clear on that, also I’m only posing the fact that you said its impossible to brake and have a stroke at the same time and this is factually incorrect. If he was blacked out I would suspect no input as you have so carefully presented but that was never my argument in the first place.

    2. No, did you not read the press release?

      “That last point refutes the erroneous rumours that have spread recently to the effect that Fernando was rendered unconscious by an electrical fault. That is simply not true. Our data clearly shows that he was downshifting while applying full brake pressure right up to the moment of the first impact – something that clearly would not have been possible had he been unconscious at the time.

      It was driver error. End of.

    3. My apologies. Stupid to say this. I only commented after reading the title.

      Alonso is OK. https://twitter.com/lsgrcbd/status/569875788524347392

      1. It’s good to apologise but come on, the article is right there for all of us to read BEFORE writing a comment, everyone should make a habit of it.

      2. Wow, he certainly hasn’t gone pale after getting knocked out.

    4. So you think he suffered a stroke, and yet still maintained the ability to apply the brakes 100% and downshift?

      Read the full article, please.

      1. It’s like playing whack-a-mole with these tin foil conspiracy guys, as soon as one theory is explained away they’re onto the next one. Won’t be long till there’s a theory about an alien abduction and the blankets were used by stewards to disguise that the driver was no longer present.

        1. There was a greenish residue found on the seat once he had been removed I heard.

          THIS JUST IN!

          Alonso is an alien.

          1. @julianwins Heh, we already knew that!

  5. Really Himmat? What have you read or heard that brings you to that conclusion? Bit of a stretch given the info I have seen that is available in the public domain! i admit it does seem a bit over the top to send and keep him in hospital for so long given the seemingly innocuous accident, but i think you are pushing it!

  6. I have to think back to Massa in Hungary 2009. He also applied full brakes after being knocked out, I don’t think that tells us too much.

    The downshifts on the other hand make it plausible that it was a driver error. Unless Fernando remembers the last seconds before the crash, I guess we will never know for sure.

    1. No he didn’t. Massa went straight into the Tyre barrier at full throttle.

      1. your both wrong. massa had the throttle and brakes on as there were spaced tyre marks.

        good to hear that alonso is ok but quite frankly if mclaren or fia had told us this alot sooner there wouldn’t be all these theories(if mclaren and fia knew yesterday).

        1. I only said he applied full breaks, I didn’t mention the throttle ;) So technically I guess I’m not wrong.

          But the point is, from that crash we learned that even while being uncouncious a driver can still apply (a) pedal(s).

          1. But not deliberately take corrective action while shifting gears

    2. That’s true about Massa’s accident, but Massa also applied full throttle at the same time as full brakes and didn’t downshift or apply any steering at all, which were clear signs that he was unconscious. Meanwhile, Alonso counter-steered after running wide (otherwise he would have gone in the opposite direction) and was downshifting in addition to braking up until the first impact.

      I think that, like Sainz’s accident, this was primarily the result of the wind – I get the feeling that people underestimate just how much wind affects F1 cars. Gusts of wind can have a huge effect on them. I remember a comment by Andrew Green (Force India’s technical director) suggesting that one of their main focuses for 2015 was ensuring that the car was less disturbed by wind than the 2014 car, because apparently their 2014 car was a real handful to drive in windy conditions which left them a lot slower in windy qualifying sessions (I think he gave Austin as an example).

      1. Massa was downshifting – you could see it in the footage

    3. I don’t think that tells us too much.

      But the downshifts do. Categorically.

      1. No chance Mclaren has a system that brings the gears down with braking? Perhaps as an emergency system to prevent stalling? I’m not suggesting they have an auto transmission but these cars have many redundant systems to prevent stalling. You factually cannot say that a system like this wasnt enabled just like I cannot say a system like this was. We can both only guess. Categorically.

        1. Not sure, I’d assume an F1 car would only carry the required safety features and no more, as they might negatively effect performance, especially an auto downshift system, sounds heavy. Also, I think that would come under the category of an automatic gear box, which isn’t allowed by the rules (I assume).

        2. I’m pretty much certain that would be illegal, and also McLaren said that Alonso was downshifting, not that the car was. You’re looking for an angle when there absolutely isn’t one, and I have no idea why.

        3. We cannot categorically say that the accident wasn’t triggered when Alonso, while momentarily distracted, accidentally assumed his true lizard form, rendering him temporarily unable to control the car. But I think we can make a pretty reasonable judgement call as to the likelihood of either, can’t we.

          Also, a system which sifted gears automatically would be against the rules.

          But please, do continue trying to find any little loophole in reality which might allow your wile theories about the accident to be true.

          1. Hey im also down that alonso cant handle some wind. Mclaren lying in a press release or alonso not being able to handle wind are equally plausible.

      2. Categorically speaking, if you were receiving voltage through your body while downshifting an F1 car, your hand could seize up (possibly more than once) and cause 1 or more downshifts.

        So categorically speaking, downshifts are back on the table for an event possible during a voltage event or stroke.

  7. Doesn’t seem too serious. I think Fernando will be able to particpate in the next test, they will put him the last two days so he can recover as much as possible.

  8. This paradoxically doesn’t make me any less nervous. If everything was normal and it was just an accident as we see many times, not down to an unprecedented factor, why was it so severe on the driver?

    1. That’s because it was a sideways impact, which is not the main concern of safety measures.

    2. I think this is a similar situation to Perez’s crash at Monaco in 2011. Like Alonso, Perez alsosuffered a concussion from the accident and stayed in hospital for multiple days. His accident was also a side-on crash like Alonso’s (which, as others have said, means that there will not have been any bodywork deformation to soften the blow).
      The only major difference is that, while Monaco is one of the slower circuits out there, Perez’s accident likely occurred at a higher speed than Alonso’s. However, from what I’ve read, the wall that Alonso hit side-on was made of concrete, which will have resulted in a much stiffer impact than e.g. a tyre barrier and obviously won’t have deformed like an armco barrier, which could explain the high g-force of the impact.

      1. Also of note is that Perez had to skip the next race (Canadian GP) two weeks later, after he tried to participate in free practice decided that he didn’t feel well enough yet.

        1. *he decided that

    3. @fixy because it was against a concrete wall. now one may ask why there is still concrete structures around a racetrack…

    4. the nose and tail of a car deform in crash so they take the load. There’s little to nothing that will deform and take the load of a crash on a side impact so the driver takes more of a hit. It doesn’t take much.

  9. As Alonso is “chatting to family, friends, and hospital staff”, it would be nice to actually hear his version of what happened. I suppose it’s possible that he would have no recollection though. Good to hear that he’s ok at least.

  10. Well it all makes sense now, as long as we discount Seb’s version. I’m thinking maybe he didn’t get quite such a clear view as he thought.

    1. If it’s true ALO was unresponsive for several minutes after the crash, I don’t expect to see him in the car for the last week of testing – could be more serious than McL thinks.

    2. I don’t see any inconsistency between Vettel’s account and McLaren’s explanation.

      Vettel saw the end of the incident “The speed was slow – maybe 150kph. Then he turned right into the wall”, which McLaren describe as “spitting it back towards the inside of the circuit, where it regained traction and struck the wall side-on”.

      As for the “It looked strange” comment, it was an unusual accident, it is rare for drivers to crash on the inside of a straight when they have not had a spin, so I am sure it did look odd, certainly all the reporters at the circuit thought it was a bizarre incident.

      It seems the accident was a combination of Fernando’s mistake in running wide and “unpredictably gusty winds”, just one of these factors without the other and there may not have been an accident at all.

      1. Vettel would have seen and felt the kicked up dirt from Alonso going offline though.

  11. Ban astroturf.

    It makes F1 look dangerous – like this accident or many previous ones in the wet – too easy for drivers, or just ridiculous when it comes adrift, gets wrapped around cars and causes interruptions to races.

    1. There is actually no AstroTurf in corner 3. Since few years it’s been put into asphalt. There is a 10-meter wide asphalt line. Same width as track itself.

      So there is something they don’t want to tell us.

  12. Lewisham Milton
    23rd February 2015, 17:55

    Does the wind only affect Spanish drivers?

    1. Must be the food!

    2. So you are saying every driver ont he circuit should have had the same crash?

  13. Quite relieved to hear the news.. would love to see Fernando in action for the last test and some solid testing for McLaren..

    I have this feeling that McLaren will be the second best team behind Mercedes by mid of this season …

  14. The real question is how did the electrocution shock his unconscious limbs into braking and shifting, and how long has an unconscious Alonso been driving cars?

    1. @chaddy Unconscious Alonso is the best unconscious driver.. matched by unconscious Hamilton, occasionally unconscious Vettel, unconscious Raikkonen…

      1. Kimi often appears unconscious in interviews.

      2. Senna “in the zone” around Monaco was the best of the lot – seeing his own car from above, and about a second ahead of it!

      3. No one is a match for unconscious Maldonado though.

    2. @chaddy
      Sometimes grabbing an electric fence mistakenly (on a farm ) can make your hands grip it harder , I’ve done it , ouch

      That could explain the braking ,

      It could also explain many of Pastors crashes ,

      Anyway .@tonybananas explanation is clearly the most reasonable :)

      1. Wait until you have accidentally taken a pee on one!

  15. The amount of speculation and knee-jerk opinions people are having on this is amazing. Even after this article, here in the comments.

    Remember when Maldonado crashed in China: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F2qZtSaoqg

    F1 cars are extremely demanding and nervous. Even at very, very slow speeds, and reasonably slow speeds for F1 is still very fast in the real world.

    I don’t get, why people have to invent fantastical explanations without evidence, for comparatively mundane events, which have tons of more probable, boring explanations.
    That scene about the sword in a field from Joan of Arc comes to mind.

    1. If it was just a gust of wind, why didnt Jenson go out in the afternoon? After all, I dont think McLonda are in any position to be forfeiting valuable testing time – please make some sense of this knee jerk observation and provide a boring, logical explanation

      1. The answer is easy… because they need to check the car for structural damage. Remember that the impact is quite severe. The car might look okay, but since it was a side impact, a lot of the impact is absorbed by the chassis itself, thus needed to be checked thoroughly. If they just replace the visually damaged parts (FW and rear suspension and maybe front suspension?) they can came out again, but even then there’ll be only a little time left for Button to do any meaningful run.

    2. @mateuss Maldonado in China reminded me of someone using their phone while driving and thus having a distraction accident, as at the time he was adjusting a dial on the steering wheel. Simple multi-tasking failure, which is common in males that think mainly in each hemisphere!

      This crash for Alonso is actually a carbon copy it seems of Maldonado’s crash in Spain qualifying.. wind, caught out by astroturf, side-on impact to wall rather than a spin. Sainz Jr spun out.

  16. I don’t believe them.

    1. @saubers1 I highly doubt they would lie about something like this. May I ask what makes you not believe them?

  17. Possible scenario of Alonso’s crash in Barcelona.


    1. Except there is no AstroTurf. That green is just painted asphalt.

  18. Dear Fernando, I swear on the sacred Mount Fuji that what has happened has nothing to do with 2007

  19. I realise this is an unlikely scenario, but I was wondering if the problem was caused by excessive gas inside the KERS battery “venting” in such a way that Alonso breathed in some of the fumes, and this made him drowsy.

    1. Like I said… whack-a-mole.

  20. Sorry I am not buying the story at all. You never sedate. Concussed patient. He has been in the ICU for 3 days. If it were a gust of wind why didn’t Seb go off too since they were close together? These cars didn’t all fly off course in Suzuka last year and ran during a typhoon which I am positive had stronger wind gusts. I hope & pray Fernando is ok. I want to hear multiple “mama Mia” everytime he sees those quicker Ferraris pass him on track. FIA & McLaren need to be transparent especially after Jules.

    1. Alonso made a mistake, Seb didn’t. Alonso is an excellent driver, one of the best, but also human so can make a mistake now and again. A strong gust of wind can happen in less than a second.

      Who said Alonso was sedated? He’s been in observation in hospital as a precaution as in a small number of concussive injuries, the patient’s condition can deteriorate seriously. What are your medical credentials to tell us what procedures are and are not followed in such cases.

      McLaren have told us what happened and there is nothing more to report but tinfoil wearers will never be satisfied so will go on inventing further increasingly implausible scenarios with no evidence to support them

      1. @Tony Hamilton
        JMS is correct – it was reported that Alonso was sedated at the crash site. He was described as “agitated” according to medical personnel.

        1. Sedated doesn’t necesarrily mean rendered unconscious. Some forms of sedation can be used to help prevent swelling in the brain by reducing cognitive activity and hence workload of the brain

    2. Perhaps he suffered a mild DAI. It would explain why they’re not saying that for fear of worrying everybody unnecessarily after Jules’ accident.

  21. I think those jumping down the throats of those who dare to suggest anything unusual is going on here, are just as bad as the wild conspiracy theorists.

    It wouldn’t be that odd or unusual from a marketing/PR point of view, to keep Alonso’s true condition quiet if he’d suffered a shock, or even had some sort of fit/blackout. In fact, given how much is at stake, I’d expect it to be dealt with like this. That’s before we even consider patient confidentiality.

    Most people aren’t suggesting wild, mad conspiracy theories here, they’re just saying it’s unusual that given the damage to that car (a broken front wing and not much else) it’s very odd that he was unconscious for so long, sedated and kept in hospital for this amount of time. Various people have smashed into walls at all sorts of angles, at much higher speeds, and walked away. As we know, an F1 car’s suspension breaks very easily (“you could break it with your foot” – one of Brundle’s standards), but didn’t in this case. It must have been quite a low speed impact, though McLaren haven’t stated a figure. Remember, he left the track at 150kph, the impact must have been far lower.

    In short – I’m not saying it’s impossible that he simply suffered a concussion and it’s all otherwise normal, but it isn’t crazy to suggest something more is going on.

    And the people saying this aren’t mad conspiracy theorists – Gary Hartstein is saying exactly the same thing. https://twitter.com/former_f1doc

    1. Exactly, there has been enough conflicting information coming out that it’s not strange that people mistrust a PR statement.

      If we would all simply believe PR statements at face value then the world would be a lot simpler for people trying to hide the truth …

  22. The rumour is Alonso suffered some memory loss after the accident.

    I agree with others. If everything is fine, why keep him in ICU this long. much much more to this than we’re been told.

Comments are closed.