F1 Driver Nelson Piquet Accuses Team Managers of Ordering Him To Crash

[The Tony Show]

In a prepared written statement to the FIA today, driver Nelson Piquet claims that team managers Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds ordered him to deliberately crash his car in a particular corner on a particular lap in order to help teammate Fernando Alonso win the race. It worked.

Several reporters and technicians have been skeptical of the crash since it happened, and this testimony seems to indicate that the long suspected "Team orders" really do exist in F1. Piquet claims that he felt pressured to be complicit due to Briatore's refusal to give a clear answer as to whether or not he would be renewing Piquet's contract. According to Piquet, Briatore's delay in finalizing the contract was an intentional ploy to put Piquet in a mental state that would make it easier to convince him to participate in the ruse.

Originally Posted by Nelson Piquet

8. At the time of this conversation I was in a very fragile and emotional state of mind. This state of mind was brought about by intense stress due to the fact that Mr. Briatore had refused to inform me of whether or not my driver's contract would be renewed for the next racing year (2009), as is customarily the case in the middle of the year (around July or August). Instead, Mr. Briatore repeatedly requested me to sign an "option", which meant that I was not allowed to negotiate with any other teams in the meantime. He would repeatedly put pressure on me to prolong the option I had signed, and would regularly summon me into his office to discuss these renewals, even on racing days - a moment which should be a moment of concentration and relaxation before the race. This stress was accentuated by the fact that during the Formula One Grand Prix of Singapore I had qualified sixteenth on the grid, so I was very insecure about my future at the Renault team. When I was asked to crash my car and cause a safety car incident in order to help the team, I accepted because I hoped that it could improve my position within the team at this critical time in the race season. At no point was I told by anyone that by agreeing to cause an incident, I would be guaranteed a renewal of my contract or any other advantage. However, in the context, I thought that it would be helpful in achieving this goal. I therefore agreed to cause the incident.

9. After the meeting with Mr. Symonds and Mr. Briatore, Mr. Symonds took me aside to a quiet corner and, using a map, pointed me to the exact corner of the track where I should crash. This corner was selected because the specific location of the track did not have any cranes that would allow a damaged car to be swiftly lifted off the track, nor did it have any side entrances to the track, which would allow a Safety Marshall to quickly move the damaged car away from the track. Therefore, it was felt that a crash in this specific position would be nearly certain to cause an obstruction on the track which would thus necessitate the deployment of a safety car in order to allow the track to be cleared and to ensure the safe continuation of the race.

10. Mr. Symonds also told me which exact lap to cause the incident upon, so that a strategy could deployed for my team-mate Mr. Fernando Alonso to refuel at the pit shortly before the deployment of the safety car, which he indeed did during lap twelve. The key to this strategy resided in the fact that the near-knowledge that the safety car would be deployed in lap thirteen/fourteen allowed the Team to start Mr. Alonso's car with an aggressive fuel strategy using a light car containing enough fuel to arrive at lap twelve, but not much more. This would allow Mr. Alonso to overtake as many (heavier) cars as possible, knowing that those cars would have difficulty catching up with him later in the race due to the later deployment of the safety car. This strategy was successful and Mr. Alonso won the 2008 Formula One Grand Prix of Singapore.

Nasty stuff. Lawyers will have a field day with this one. Full statement can be seen HERE.

[orconn]

What else is new? I quess it's Piquet's admission that he acted on team orders to the benefit of a team member that's new. However, you'd think he could've just the fuel turn off button and saved the wear and tear on the car!

[The Tony Show]

It's always been a "wink wink, nudge nudge" sort of thing, with no driver ever admitting to doing it.

There's always been the whole "Let the teammate with more points win the race" deal, sort of like the World Challenge race where Lou Gigliotti slowed down his Corvette and let the CTS-V pass him since Cadillac was in close contention with Porsche for a Manufacturer's championship, but this is different. A decision during a race to have one car back off so the contending driver can get more points is one thing, but planning out a fuel strategy based on prior knowledge of an "accident" is tampering, and taints the entire results of the season.

A driver actually putting it in writing and discussing the planning and details is a pretty big deal.

[DILLIGAF]

Sad sad deal,I have always looked at F1 as the purest and most tech form of auto racing.Sucks to see Nascar crap leach into it!I think the guy is telling the truth!

[thebigjimsho]

F1 is 100 X more corrupt than NASCAR could ever think to be...

[orconn]

Originally Posted by thebigjimsho

F1 is 100 X more corrupt than NASCAR could ever think to be...

I agree! Remember many our forefathers came from Europe where corruption has been going on a lot longer!

[dkozloski]

I've often wondered why more teams didn't employe a strategic crash scenario. Nascar changed the rules to prohibit a driver from benefitting from his own crash or stoppage on the track. In fact the miscreant that brought that about was Dale Earnhardt Jr. It seems to me that anytime that there is a greenflag stop situation, your guy should stay out until he's the only one on the lead lap then have the low man on the team crash. Of course with the "wave around rule" he'd lose the lap advantage but he'd still be in the lead.