FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[NHcheese]

So Mercedes are up against it.

[andrew]

Well someone is, be it Mercedes, Pirelli, the FiA, all 3 or a couple of them. That still remains to be confirmed, so speculate away until at least the 20th of the month.

[spankyham]

This is possibly the most inflammatory story yet to be written in the whole "tire test" thingy. This journo is basically flat out accusing one of the key personalities of outright lying. I genuinely have no idea who they are referring to, but it's a pretty unsavory accusation IMO. If you're going to make that sort of claim isn't incumbent on you to be specific and stand behind what your claiming?

 wrote:">Tyred of all the scandal

As a Formula One journalist (and one who's spent a fair bit of the past few years obsessing over tyres), everyone expects me to have an opinion on The Great Tyre Test scandal of 2013. But I just can't bring myself to care.

There's no denying it's big news. After all, whatever happens when Mercedes and Pirelli state their cases in front of the FIA's specially convened International Tribunal is going to have a dramatic outcome on the season as a whole. No one is entirely sure what penalties are likely to be issued should the test be found to have been illegal, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the Silver Arrows will find themselves excluded from this year's World Constructors' Championship.



But the problem with the story is that while it's going to become big news when the Tribunal meets, hears the cases stated by Merc and Pirelli, and decides whether or not rules were broken, at the moment it's little more than rumour, conjecture, and hearsay. But rumour, conjecture, and hearsay are a great way to fill column inches, generate page views, and keep F1 a major talking point.

Over the Monaco Grand Prix weekend I was told unequivocally by one source that Pirelli had written confirmation from the FIA that the test was legal, which was why they went ahead with it. I was also explicitly told that the FIA had not granted permission for such a test.

Rumours spread around the paddock like wildfire, and have hardly abated since. For a few moments, it was 'official' that Ferrari's secret tyre test had involved one of the Corse Clienti cars, and not a recent Formula One car. Then it transpired that the car was recent(ish), but that it had been run by the Corse Clienti team, not the race team, and with Pedro de la Rosa behind the wheel. Source contradicted source until it was impossible to know what had really happened.

All that we can say for certain is that Ferrari conducted a secret in-season tyre test that has since been found to have operated within the full letter of the law, while Mercedes conducted a similar test whose legality is currently under dispute.

What has been most interesting about this from a personal perspective has been the impact it has had on certain relationships within the paddock. As journalists, we spend our days building relationships with people who are in the position to give us the inside scoop - or as much of that scoop as has been deemed safe to give us at the time.

They're odd relationships. On the one hand, a good journalist knows that a lot (all…) of the information they are given off the record is not the full story. We're given enough of the story to know that there's something to pursue, but we listen in the full knowledge that certain elements will have been emphasised or left out with a view to protecting a public image, to creating a certain spin.

It is then up to the individual journalist to chase down the rest of the story, to find out as much as they can in order to paint as full a picture as possible for you, the reader.

That is the point at which we start to rely on those relationships that have been proved trustworthy over the years, to approach those sources who are willing - off the record - to provide the sorts of explanations that become the foundations for our on-the-record conversations, our questions, our investigations.

So what does one do when one of those sources discredits him or herself by passing on Top Secret information that has little to no relationship to the truth?

While a bid for self-protection (or the protection of one's employer) is understandable, deliberately passing on misinformation to the media is damaging in the long-term. Relationships that take years to build can be destroyed in an instant, and in a 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' sort of world, an individual with no backs to scratch can find themselves very lonely, very fast.

Whatever the fall-out from the decisions of the FIA International Tribunal, one of the less visible outcomes of The Great Tyre Test Scandal of 2013 has been the breakdown of trust between a number of key F1 stakeholders. Misinformation has been deliberately spread in an attempt at self-protection that looks an awful lot like self-destruction from inside the paddock gates.

[racechick]

Who is this guy on about????????

[What's Burning?]

I wish he'd come out and said who he caught lying because someone in F1 looking out for their best interests and willing o lie in the process is not recent news at all.

[Jabberwocky]

he does not know who is lying as the "truth" has not come out yet. I am just hoping that this is not Ross' way of standing aside for Paddy.

[LRW]

Bernie Ecclestone says Mercedes should have said 'no' when asked to test Pirelli's tyres
F1 boss also feels tyre manufacturer did nothing wrong


Bernie Ecclestone says Mercedes should have said 'no' when approached by Pirelli to carry out a tyre test at the Circuit de Catalunya in May.

Following an investigation by the race stewards in Monaco, both companies have been called to face the FIA International Tribunal in Paris next Thursday over the testgate saga.

"Wait until the tribunal, they've got all the facts," Ecclestone told Adam Cooper's blog. "If you offer me stolen goods, it's up to me to decide whether I want to accept them or not. It's not up to anyone to tell me what I should do. I should know what I should do.

"Pirelli were doing the right thing, obviously. They couldn't get out of a tyre problem, if there had been proper testing, which there should be, they wouldn't be in this problem.

"It's only because there's no proper testing that they're in this problem. As people have been complaining, the obvious thing to do was to get out of it by testing. And they asked."

In-season testing is banned by the Sporting Regulations, but Pirelli feel their commercial agreement with the FIA allows them to conduct a test and when asked if he felt the tyre manufacturer had done anything wrong, Ecclestone added: "Not at all."

As part of the deal, Pirelli have significant advertising at each circuit, but the F1 supremo says the financial implications have no impact on his opinion.

"I don't care. It makes no difference to me. What is right, is right, you know. The one thing an unmarried girl has got is the right to say 'no'," he said.

"You would have to reckon that Mercedes were in that position..."

There had been speculation French tyre firm Michelin have been lined up to replace Pirelli in 2014, but Ecclestone was keen to play down those reports.

"No idea. I haven't got a clue," he said. "I haven't spoken to anyone. We have a long-term contract with Pirelli, as the FIA do. And I think most of the teams have - I think they've done a deal with all the teams they want to do a deal with."

So Bernie thinks Pirelli did nothing wrong - but Mercedes were stupid for getting involved...

[1Lemon]

So Bernie thinks Pirelli did nothing wrong - but Mercedes were stupid for getting involved...

Holy crap, do I agree with Bernie on an issue!?! Excuse me whilst I execute myself

[1Lemon]

Side Note:

The one thing an unmarried girl has got is the right to say 'no'," he said.

I'm concerned why only unmarried girls fall into this...

[Hammer278]

Side Note:

The one thing an unmarried girl has got is the right to say 'no'," he said.

I'm concerned why only unmarried girls fall into this...

Same question here!

Now we know why Bernie is divorced.

[What's Burning?]

The police often offer confiscated stolen goods for sale Bernie.

[Jabberwocky]

because married women have not rights



[/joke]

[darwin dali]

because married women have not rights



[/joke]

[vaptin]

I wouldn't trust ESPN, they also posted an article about how Ferrari would get it too.

Not sure I'd trust Bild either, can't remember from their previous articles quoted (in general for F1) if they were accurate.

Bernie, yeah lets trust Bernie, he'd never lie or mislead us. . . still if Bernie getting involved, the clear implication is: s*** just got real

Trust no one. . .

Well, not sure there is any new news,

[1Lemon]

If someone makes a documentry on F1 in 2012/13 the title would read:

F1 2013:
Trust no one....