You’d have thought that with the announcement of the outcome of the FIA World Motor Sport Council’s hearing yesterday, the Singapore controversy would die down. Instead, another potentially explosive and certainly unhelpful time-bomb has been ignited with the release of the audio tapes from the hearing.
The audio tapes reveal an unsettled bone of contention between Piquet and Symonds on who came up with the plan to crash in order to cause a safety car, although Piquet’s legal team implicate Symonds by pointing to his seniority within the team and the unlikelihood of Piquet coming up with a strategy that would in effect make him look like a fool and gift Alonso a win.
However, the real eyebrow-raiser is the unveiling in Renault’s submission of Witness X. This witness is reportedly someone who was present at discussions about the crash, who knew about the crash before it happened and who was informed about it initially by Pat Symonds. This raises a number of questions:
- Who is this Witness X? Or, to put it another way, who might Pat Symonds tell about such a plot?
- Do they still work for Renault F1?
- Why has their identity been protected? Why exactly is this person protected above others?
If a fourth person knew about this plot and then kept quiet when it was enacted – regardless of their involvement in actually carrying the plot out – then they are surely implicated in conspiring to cover up in the aftermath of the plot. From the way the submissions are phrased, it seems that this person is still employed by Renault F1, which would mean that Renault have in their ranks an employee who has knowingly conspired in a covering up (although not actively implementing) a plot that knowingly endangered the lives of drivers and spectators, and which caused the Renault F1 team to cause a deliberate crash in order to unfairly gain his team an advantage. People like this should not be involved in F1.
The identity of Witness X has been made known to the President of the FIA and to some of the FIA’s lawyers. Speculation as to who this may be will rumble on. Many will conclude that the reason this person’s identity has been concealed is because they are of relative importance within the team. Indeed, you would think that, given the nature of such a plot, the person must be a senior, trusted member of the team – why would you divulge such dangerous details to a junior team member?
Suspicion seems to have fallen on three people – firstly, Piquet’s engineer, secondly, Fernando Alonso, and thirdly, Bob Bell, Renault’s Technical Director. Many will pin the blame on Alonso, but this seems unlikely to me. What we know is that Witness X knew of the plan, dismissed it, and was not aware that such a plot would be carried out until after it has been. The first thing Alonso remarked after the race upon seeing Flavio Briatore prior to the podium ceremony was on the good fortune of the safety car coming out when it did. If Alonso had suspicions and had distanced himself from a plot, I very much doubt he would have said anything at all. Bob Bell, the Technical Director, has been mentioned because he apparently appears prominently in a number of photographs from the Singapore Grand Prix, and is usually a man who keeps in the background. However, there does not appear to be any evidence to actually implicate him with any knowledge.
This leaves Piquet’s race engineer, who clearly seemed suspicious, raising questions about Piquet’s request over the radio to know which lap he is on – an unusual request. It may be an unusual request, but why would you consult your Executive Technical Director before responding to such a question – unless you were suspicious?
Just a thought.