[Mikko Nassi]

If I stole your Rotax Max engine and opened it up to discover the secrets of its preparation would I be cheating?

No. You'd be stealing, not cheating.

In fact if you stole my Rotax Max engine and used it in a race you wouldn't be cheating, you'd simply be using a stolen engine that is perfectly legal according to the technical regulations to race. I could report you to the police but I couldn't get you disqualified for cheating at a race at least not with the rule-book backing me up.

i think they did cheat by using the information they gained, although impossible to prove.

Why is that cheating though? Nothing in the regulations says that using information obtained from other teams (be it by sharing information willingly or by stealing 780 pages of info) is cheating. In F1 you do have to manufacture the car yourself, which is why for example SA got a lot of heat early this year, but using information from other teams is not cheating.

Yes, spying goes on all the time. In F1, its a art by it-self. Just that McLaren got caught. once caught will be label as cheats. Same story with Toyota in rally. Rumor was most top teams were using some form of turbo bypass. just that Toyota got caught and label cheats.

The difference here is that in Toyota's case they were using something illegal on their cars which is cheating, McLaren aren't.

[Alex Ritchie]

In fact if you stole my Rotax Max engine and used it in a race you wouldn't be cheating, you'd simply be using a stolen engine that is perfectly legal according to the technical regulations to race. I could report you to the police but I couldn't get you disqualified for cheating at a race at least not with the rule-book backing me up.

Why is that cheating though? Nothing in the regulations says that using information obtained from other teams (be it by sharing information willingly or by stealing 780 pages of info) is cheating. In F1 you do have to manufacture the car yourself, which is why for example SA got a lot of heat early this year, but using information from other teams is not cheating.
..........

The difference here is that in Toyota's case they were using something illegal on their cars which is cheating, McLaren aren't.

So within the Sporting Regulations it is okay to steal as long as the end product conforms to the technical rules - never mind about intellectual property and so on....

Toyota's case was totally different. They were caught with an ingenious, well-engineered device on their cars - an exhaust gas powered restrictor to the inlet of the turbo that expanded when the engine was revved but contracted when the engine was switched off. Measure it at rest and it would be legal.

[Mikko Nassi]

[
So within the Sporting Regulations it is okay to steal as long as the end product conforms to the technical rules - never mind about intellectual property and so on....

Yeah that's where I'm coming from.

Why is using info from a stolen 780 page document considered cheating when if that info was obtained through a partnership (for example honda-super aguri or Red Bull-STR or previously Ferrari-Sauber) or by trackside spying there would be no problem with it. I feel it's harsh to label it as cheating because imo it's industrial espionage/theft which is very different.

[Alex Ritchie]

Yeah that's where I'm coming from.

Why is using info from a stolen 780 page document considered cheating when if that info was obtained through a partnership (for example honda-super aguri or Red Bull-STR or previously Ferrari-Sauber) or by trackside spying there would be no problem with it. I feel it's harsh to label it as cheating because imo it's industrial espionage/theft which is very different.

The FIA actually charged McLaren under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code, which reads:

151. Breach of rules

Any of the following offences in addition to any offences specifically referred to previously, shall be deemed to be a breach of these rules :

a) All bribery or attempt, directly or indirectly, to bribe any person having official duties in relation to a competition or being employed in any manner in connection with a competition and the acceptance of, or offer to accept, any bribe by such an official or employee.

b) Any action having as its object the entry or participation in a competition of an automobile known to be ineligible therefor.

c) Any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor sport.

This is a catch-all Article which allows the FIA to punish whom they like when they cannot find any other reason. The 7 F1 teams that did not start the US GP 2005 because they were advised by Michelin that their tyres were unsafe were charged under this article too. The FIA ruled that they had committed "an act prejudicial to the interests" by failing to ensure that Michelin brought suitable tyres!

In the McLaren case what caused confusion, to me at least and I am sure to many others too, was that they were found guilty in July but not given any penalty because the team apparently did not gain any advantage from their actions.

Read Article 151c again carefully and you will note that there is nothing about "gaining an unfair advantage" there. In fact, in the case of US GP 2005 the teams took themselves out of the race - disqualified themselves - and yet they were charged under this very same rule.

So why did McLaren get off with the invention of this new interpretation of the rule? Did the fact that a British driver - the best rookie ever to hit F1 - driving for a British team in the most exciting F1 championship in 20 years have anything to do with it?

Once the verdict was announced "guilty but no gain in performance, so no penalty" it was easy to see McLaren were going to be nailed sooner or later.

Thanks to Ferrari it was actually shown that the flow of data amounted to the 780 page document plus 323 text messages and telephone calls from Stepney to Coughlan from March til mid-June, various e-mails and at least one face to face meeting in April.

Among the information received was: (i) Ferrari's flexi-nose - which led to the change in the way the FIA tests for nose flex, which led to both Ferrari and McLaren changing the specs of their cars; (ii) Ferrari's variable brake balance system - which led to a similar McLaren system being developed; (iii) Ferrari's flexi-but-legal rear wing - which led to a similar McLaren wing; (iv) Ferrari's pit strategies for Australia, Malaysia and Bahrain; (v) Ferrari's weight distribution; (vi) Ferrai's aerobalance and (vii) what Ferrari uses to infale their tyres - apparently it is not nitrogen.

So McLaren was found guilty again and this time penalties were imposed on the team but not the drivers!

In our local kart races if a mechanic behaves badly the driver gets disqualified and/or banned. When BAR-Honda were found to be cheating in 2005 the team and drivers were disqualified and banned.

The McLaren decision appears to be a case of "make the decision based on expediency then make up the rules accordingly". The FIA probably looked at the short and long-term consequences of their penalties. Thus, preserve the excitement of the 2007 drivers championship while penalising the team, thereby preserving the long-term image of F1 by some semblance of order and fairness in enforcing the regulations. A convenient but dubious decision, in my humble opinion.

[mym]

In this case it is the "Italian vs the Brit" and I believe it is not the same as the "Brit vs the Italian"...Same case but result can be different. But do not forget that Ferrari is a crowd puller. I wonder how it is gonna be like.

If you follow the BTCC in 1994-1995, when Alfa Romeo was dominating with their model 155 in the British land. Alfa as always being an Italian went to the extreme border of the regulation and did improvements on their aerodynamics where they were caught after a complaint. Alfa was dominating the 1,2 & 3 round of the BTCC by finishing 1 & 2, if I am not mistaken. Alfa was penalised andthey were stripped the championship points for the drivers and manufacturer after being found guilty. Funny thing happen, Alfa was indeed a crowd puller. No Alfa less spectator... and lead to probably less sponsorship. They finally allow Alfa to participate, gave back the points and legalised the aerodynamics. hahahaha..... I wonder that could happen to F1.

Anyway Alex, if only John Todt or at least Michelle Yeoh read your posting. I am sure Ferrari would like to reward you... hahahaha...

[Mikko Nassi]

151. Breach of rules

Yeah they can pretty much punish anyone for anything... "bringing the sport into disrepute"... with which they can punish a driver for showing the finger in the podium celebrations for example.

so it's still not "cheating" the way that I see it.. another example of "breaking the rules" but not cheating is coming in 1kg light at the end of the race. They weren't cheating they just accidentally were 1kg light and thus were in breach of the technical regulations. For McLaren to be labelled cheaters is imo harsh, label them as thieves but not cheaters.

[RocK]

For McLaren to be labelled cheaters is imo harsh, label them as thieves but not cheaters.

Its just my personal opinion. For you Mikko, i'll edit the Title to this topic.
but which is worst? cheaters or thieves

"I don't want to play the judge," said the Italian. "If Ron Dennis believes firmly that he did nothing wrong, then he should appeal.

"I can only comment on what I see. Last year McLaren were nowhere, and now they drive for the title. I am not the one who can judge from where this performance jump came from.

"This was not a case of an engineer carrying a bit of data from another team. If you read the detail of the World Council meetings, it becomes clear that a constant flow of information took place over a period of months," Briatore said.

[Mikko Nassi]

Its just my personal opinion. For you Mikko, i'll edit the Title to this topic.
but which is worst? cheaters or thieves

Lol... imo they aren't really thieves in this case either, just lucked into some handy reading material. If it was a McLaren employee that hacked into or broke into Ferrari headquarters and stole the info then they'd be thieves... now they just accepted stolen material

I'd say in racing being called a cheater is a lot worse than being called a thief because someone accepted some material from another team. In life I have zero respect for thieves.

[Alex Ritchie]

Technically McLaren are not cheats or thieves. They behaved badly and are "in violation of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code".

But since that is a mouthful to read and a strain to write every time, the short form in English is - they cheated.